Bonds, Stocks, Gold, & Silver – Volatility On Display

The bond market seems convinced that interest rates are headed lower for now.   The chart (source) below shows the price action for TLT (iShares Long-term Treasury Bond ETF) over the past seven days…

Of particular note is the fact that the succession of higher opening prices left a series of gaps on the chart. Friday’s gap is the largest so far. Also, the total increase in price from Thursday’s close amounted to more than 3%, and accounts for one-third of the entire seven-day advance.

OTHER MARKETS

Other markets did not fare so well; particularly stocks, which sold off in aggressive fashion on Thursday and Friday.  The NASDAQ Composite Index lost 6.7%, while the S&P 500 and DJIA were both down about 4 1/2%.  This stands in stark contrast to the sharp increase in Treasury bonds. See charts for all three stock indexes below…

 

 

INCREASE IN VOLATILITY 

Oxford Languages defines volatility as “liability to change rapidly and unpredictably, especially for the worse.” People tend to focus more on “especially for the worse” when referencing volatility; however, the past two trading days in all markets have highlighted that “rapidly and unpredictably” might be more descriptive and accurate.

In addition to the volatility evidenced in both stocks and bonds, there was a better example on display in the metals markets. In early morning trade spot gold was priced as high as $2478 oz., $32 higher than where it closed the day before. Then, in the space of one hour, the gold price dropped $70 oz. to $2408. Over the course of trading gold rebounded and closed at $2443, down a negligible $3 oz.

Silver’s price action was even more rapid and unpredictable. After rising to a daily high of $29.30 oz, which was up $.84 over its previous close, the white metal dropped nearly 5% ($1.40 oz) during the space of one hour. The daily low was $27.90. Afterwards, the price rebounded to close just a few cents above its prior day’s closing price.

Here are charts for both GLD (SPDR Gold Shares ETF) and SLV (iShares Silver Trust ETF) for the same time period shown in bonds and stocks above…

 

CONCLUSION 

As we said last week: “Rate cut or not, what happens after will not be as expected or intended.” There has been no announcement yet, but the bond market is acting as if it is a done deal. It is possible that stocks are selling off under a similar presumption. Here is why…

Most investors drove stock prices higher in anticipation of rate cuts in the near term, expecting that lower rates would trigger additional economic growth and lead to capital expansion and higher stock prices. Unfortunately, the effects of a potential rate cut are already accounted for in current stock prices. The highly anticipated announcement isn’t likely to have much positive impact on stock prices and could actually trigger more selling. Also, the rapidly weakening economy could override any possible stimulus from the cut(s).

Meanwhile, volatility, i.e., the liability to change rapidly and unpredictably, especially for the worse, can be expected to increase in all markets.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

What Happens After A Rate Cut Is Announced?

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER A RATE CUT?

Has anybody considered what might happen after a rate cut is announced? If the Fed signals a change in direction regarding interest rate policy, as expected by most observers at this point, does that also signal an end to increasing weakness in the economy? Will a recession be averted (officially or not, we are in one) and employers start hiring again? Will people be able to find full-time jobs at satisfactory pay rates; will housing become affordable?

The expectations are there for a cut before the end of the year, probably by September. It is possible that what happens after that might not be consistent with current expectations. In other words, there is a level of deterioration in the economy (liquidity problems, bankruptcies, empty spaces for lease or sale, etc.) that doesn’t suddenly reverse and restore itself.

Most investors and others are so fixated on the potential rate cut that they likely haven’t given much thought to what comes next. That is, assuming that a rate cut is announced. What if the cut doesn’t come as expected or is delayed indefinitely?

MARKETS HAVE PRICED IN THE EXPECTED CUT

The financial markets have risen significantly over the past two years. Stocks have recovered all of their previous losses resulting from the Fed campaign to increase interest rates, and are sporting new all-time highs almost daily. A rush to the exits could occur from disappointment over any further delay in rate cuts. Then, too, the actual announcement of a rate cut might trigger selling anyway, since the cut is already priced in.

There is another problem, too. A goodly portion of lofty stock index valuations are tied to a few extremely large cap tech stocks. That means that the majority of individual stocks don’t share proportionately in the gains of the index. That is Investors should understand clearly that continued financial and economic weakness or a severely deep recession, along with falling stock prices, could occur whether rate cuts are announced or not. 

Bond prices reflect the current level of interest rates. Interest rates are set in the bond market. To whatever extent bond traders or investors disagree with attempts by the Fed to raise or lower interest rates, they can bid prices higher or lower, as the case may be. For example, if the effects of inflation were to worsen considerably from this point, investors would demand higher returns to offset further risk from higher inflation. This translates to lower bond prices and higher interest rates, regardless of Fed desires and intentions.

RISKS THAT CAN’T BE IGNORED 

The lasting effects from the 2008 Great Recession were such that attempts by the Fed to pursue cheap and easy credit didn’t have the desired impact. It was more convenient and less risky for banks to park the extra money with the Fed than to lend it. During almost the entire decade leading up to Covid, a weakened economy seemed to ignore all attempts by the Fed, whose biggest concern was getting inflation back up to its 2% target. (see The Fed’s 2% Inflation Target is Pointless)

Over the decades, the desired impact of Fed policy continues to fall short of the mark (see Fed Inflation Is Losing It’s Intended Effect). Whatever the Fed’s intentions, and regardless of how logical the reasoning behind its actions and policies, the economy is slower to respond after each succeeding crisis. In addition, financial and economic volatility increases cumulatively.

The Federal Reserve creates bubbles (stocks in the 1920s; bonds 1982-2022; real estate 2000-2007; everything 2020-24) by intentionally expanding the supply of money and CREDIT – the cheap and easy kind. The bubbles always get popped. There again, the Fed is the culprit. In order to contain the collateral damage of their own profligate monetary policy, more intervention of a harsher nature is usually the answer. Notwithstanding the increase in rates over the past two years, the markets have risen as a result of expectations that the Fed will once again fall off the wagon and provide more cheap lubricant for overly optimistic and addicted investors.

When the Fed became concerned about the almost maniacal obsession with stock investing in the 1920s, it started clamping down on the cheap and easy credit that afforded banks the opportunity to lend as much as 90% of a potential investment to their eager and willing customers. The banks were just as eager and willing, too; until it was too late. The economy had begun to weaken many months before the stock market crashed. The Great Depression that followed lasted for more than a decade and was characterized by 20% unemployment, bank failures, trade tariffs, political instability, and world war in Europe.

CONCLUSION 

A rate cut is expected and desired by investors, consumers, and others; almost universally so. It is unlikely at this time that markets and the economy will respond with any vigor if/when that announcement is made. It is very likely that big surprises await those who think otherwise. The possibilities include a severe swoon in all markets which have risen in response to that expectation and as a result of any or all of the other factors mentioned in this article. In addition, there is the possibility that rates could be held at this level longer, or even raised, depending on the specifics of future events.

Rate cut or not, what happens after will not be as expected or intended. (also see Interest Rate Cuts – Salvation Or Damnation?)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

Descending Price Peaks In Latest Gold Charts

The latest gold charts are pictured below and show a series of descending price peaks dating back to 1980. There are four charts. The first two charts are for the period following the August 2011 peak. The third and fourth charts are for the period after the gold price peaked in 1980. Prices on all charts are monthly average closing prices.

For example, the average closing price for gold in the month of January 1980 was $677 oz. This price ($677) is shown on Chart #3 below. During that same month, the intraday high for gold was $843 oz. The spike in price above $800 was very short-lived and not a reliable indicator of where gold traded during the month of January 1980. Average closing prices are more representative and more realistic for comparative purposes and analyses.

There are two charts for each time period. The first chart plots nominal prices; the second chart shows inflation-adjusted prices. Here is the first chart…

#1 Gold Prices August 2011-June 2024

The average closing price for gold in August 2011 was $1825 oz. After declining for more than four years, the gold price bottomed at $1060 oz. and began rising. The 2011 high was eclipsed and a new high price for gold was set at $1971 oz. in July 2020. After a sharp decline in 2022, the price of gold rose to another new high of $2327 oz., which is also the current closing price on June 28, 2024. The gold price has more than doubled (119%) since its December 2015 low.  That is quite impressive, but, there are some caveats.

Gold’s recent price performance, in total, looks very good if you are short-term oriented. The shouts of joy might be a bit overdone, though, if you have been holding gold since its peak in 2011. In that case, the total price increase for the entire thirteen-year period is only 27%. That is an annualized gain of 1.86%, which is more indicative of a slow-moving wagon, rather than a rocket ship in blastoff mode.

The numbers in both cases are made worse when the effects of inflation are factored in…

#2 Gold Prices (inflation-adjusted) August 2011-June 2024

In Chart #2, the effects of inflation have turned the 2011 high and subsequent new highs in 2020 and 2024 into a series of descending peaks. Each successive peak almost matches, but doesn’t quite reach the previous high point. The total gain of 119% referenced in Chart #1 is almost halved, down to 66%. The meager nominal price increase of 27% is now a net loss (-8%). The $1825 oz. nominal price peak in 2011 correlates to a real (inflation-adjusted) price of $2529 oz. in today’s cheaper dollar(s),

Now, let’s look at gold’s price performance over a longer time period. Here is Chart #3…

#3 Gold Prices January 1980-June 2024

When the gold price peaked in January 1980, it correlated to the effects of inflation that had depleted U.S. dollar purchasing power by 97% over the previous half-century. At $677 oz., the gold price was thirty-three times higher than it was when gold and the dollar were interchangeable, i.e., convertible, at a fixed ratio of $20.67 per ounce. The next major peak for the gold price was in 2011 at $1825 oz., followed by 2020 and 2024. Now, lets look at inflation-adjusted prices dating back to 1980…

#4 Gold Prices (inflation-adjusted) January 1980-June 2024 

In Chart #4, the ever-ascending nominal price increases shown previously in Chart #3 are more severely subdued when the effects of inflation are factored in. In addition, both volatility and time become more apparent.  While the nominal price of gold continues to rise reflecting actual loss of purchasing power in the U.S. dollar, the gold price in real (inflation-adjusted) terms has yet to exceed any of its previous price peaks; and likely never will. That is because gold’s value is in its use as money and is basically constant.

Each price peak in gold beginning in 1980 and including the peaks in 2011, 2020, and 2024 is a reflection of the intervening loss of purchasing power in the U.S. dollar since the previous peak.

CONCLUSION 

After allowing for the effects of inflation, an ounce of gold at $2400 today is no more valuable than it was at $2000 in 2020, or $1825 in 2011, or $677 in 1980. For that matter, the purchasing power of one ounce of gold is the about the same today as it was a century ago when it was priced at $20.67. In other words, if you bought gold at any of those prices and held it until now, you do not have real profits. The higher gold price is not a profit. It represents the dollar’s loss of purchasing power. (There are possible short-term trading opportunities for traders. See Understanding Profit Potential In Gold)

Gold is real money and a long-term store of value. Holding gold provides a measure of protection against depreciating currencies. Over time, the increasing price of gold matches the loss of purchasing power in the U.S. dollar that has already occurred. (also see Gold Has Done It’s Job – Isn’t That Enough?)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

“And So Rates Will Be Higher”- Jerome Powell

Jerome Powell says “rates will be higher”. I believe him. I don’t think most others do. Investors, especially, need to pay attention.

FED POLICY

I have read the text of Powell’s interview. His comments are consistent with remarks he has made over the past two years during the Fed’s  current campaign to see interest rates returned to a higher, more historically normal level…

“I think instinctively – I can’t prove this, we’re going to learn about this empirically – but it seems to me that the neutral rate is probably higher than it was during the intra-crisis period. And so, rates will be higher.” 

Read more

Interest Rate Cuts – Salvation Or Damnation?

The anticipation and speculation regarding interest rate cuts is almost comical to watch. Scratch ‘almost’. Interested observers are obsessive about the topic in a hilariously funny way. Mainstream media and the pundits always find cause for promoting a possible rate cut no matter what is said. (see Investors Re: Rate Cuts)

The expectation for at least one cut of 1/4 point before the end of this year seems to be nearly universal, so let’s go with that for now. Here are some questions for consideration.

Read more

Bank Stress Test Results Are Just Window Dressing

  • window dressing: an adroit but superficial or actually misleading presentation of something, designed to create a favorable impression.
    the government’s effort has amounted to little more than window dressing” (Oxford Languages)

BANK STRESS TESTS – FEELING GOOD AND TALKIN’ THE TALK

The Federal Reserve recently reported the results of its annual economic stress tests for banks. The test supposedly indicates how banks can be expected “to perform under certain hypothetical economic conditions.”

The reason it is termed a stress test is because the hypothetical conditions are negative in nature…

The 2024 stress test shows that the 31 large banks subject to the test this year have sufficient capital to absorb nearly $685 billion in losses and continue lending to households and busi- nesses under stressful conditions.Executive Summary @ federalreserve.gov

The June 26, 2024 press release stated that the “Federal Reserve Board annual bank stress test showed that while large banks would endure greater losses than last year’s test, they are well positioned to weather a severe recession and stay above minimum capital requirements“.

This year’s test was modified to be more stringent in order to reflect the possibility of more severe liquidity problems for banks in light of numerous bank failures experienced last year, highlighted by Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). Below is how the matter was addressed by Fed Chair Jerome Powell at that time…

So, I guess our view is that the banking system is sound and it’s resilient—it’s got strong capital [and] liquidity. We took powerful actions with [the] Treasury and the FDIC, which demonstrate that all depositors’ savings are safe and that the banking system is safe.Mar 22, 2023 

The statement was a bit premature as other banks subsequently failed. Anxiety was calmed however, and fears were tempered. A followup statement by Chair Powell provided additional reassurance…

“The U.S. banking system is sound and resilient, with strong levels of capital and liquidity. (Powell, July 23, 2023)

QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS 

What if conditions are worse than those simulated in the stress tests? In financial and economic matters, it most always seems to be that way. The current stress test parameters allow for declining interest rates. The Fed may want to see rates lowered in a crisis, but wholesale dumping of worthless credit obligations would send interest rates through the roof. We saw that in 2008 with residential mortgages specifically and bonds in general. The Fed might not be able to stem the tide with purchases for their own account as they did then.

Banks are notoriously illiquid. There are no reserve requirements. The 10% fractional-reserve requirement based on total bank deposits was eliminated several years ago. That’s not much, but, at least it provided a measure of (il)liquidity and a margin of solvency. For example, if a bank has $1MM in deposits and lends out $900,000, the remaining $100,000 is still available to meet withdrawal demands. Now that the reserve requirement has been eliminated, it is not unrealistic to assume that some (or, most) banks probably have loaned out more money than they have in total deposits. In other words, there are no reserves, so how can a bank be expected to meet net outflows/withdrawal demand?

The reserve requirement was eliminated for two reasons: 1) to support efforts to flood the economy with money in response to the forced Covid shutdown and resumption of economic activity afterwards and 2) most banks were probably in danger of violating the existing 10% reserve requirement; remove the requirement and the problem goes away – for a little while, maybe. (see more about fractional-reserve banking)

The banks aren’t satisfied, though. They want less stringent requirements.

CONCLUSION

The extent and duration of pending financial and economic crises will be worse than any previous ones. The events themselves and their negative effects will confirm that bank stress tests and their results are inadequate, unreliable, and virtually worthless.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

Inflation – Where We Are Now Part II

NOTE: Part of the article I posted yesterday (Sunday) did not show up in the referral link sent with the standard email announcement. The text below is everything that followed the CPI bar chart.

Inflation – How It Started And Where We Are Now 

continued…

We can see on the chart that the annual CPI rate is under 5% almost eighty percent of the time and that prices actually dropped about ten percent of the time (red years 1920’s, 1930’s). The potential for volatility increases, though, because of the cumulative effects of inflation.

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF INFLATION 

The first year pictured on the chart is 1914, one year after the inception (1913) of the Federal Reserve. Prices rose by one percent in 1914, followed by a rise of almost two percent in 1915.

Now, imagine that the two percent rise in 1915 was stacked on top of the one percent rise in 1914, followed by each subsequent year being posted similarly. Each succeeding year adds to the height of the first and only column.

The exceptions to the continually increasing height are the years shown in red, which result in reducing the effects of inflation and decreasing the height of the column temporarily.

After a more than one hundred years of inflation, the single column won’t fit on a single page, if we use the same scale as in the horizontal bar chart above.

The cumulative effects of a century of inflation are thus: the U.S. dollar has lost ninety-nine percent of its purchasing power. That means that it takes one hundred times as much for the goods and services we buy as it would without the effects of inflation.

WHERE WE ARE NOW 

In a very real sense, the U.S. dollar has already collapsed. Nearly all of the dollar’s loss of purchasing power has occurred since the depths of the Great Depression in the 1930s. As much as the Federal Reserve might prefer otherwise, most of its time is spent reacting to the cumulative, more extreme effects of the inflation they have created for more than one hundred years.

When the Fed chair talks about “reducing inflation”, what he means is that the Fed is trying to control the effects of inflation which the Fed, itself, has been creating since its inception in 1913. Interest rate manipulation might affect the activity of consumers and investors in negative ways that exacerbate current problems and/or cause other problems. The announced intention about “fighting inflation” by raising interest rates will likely have unintended consequences that overwhelm any efforts and intentions to restore stability.

A certain amount of inflation is necessary to keep the economy from collapsing. Originally, a little bit of inflation was seen as a stimulant to economic activity and productivity; now it has become a necessity. Keeping the wheels greased can keep the slowly moving wagon in motion. At some point, though, the wheels will come off.

The situation is very similar to that which is experienced by drug addicts. Each successive fix requires a stronger dose and any positive effects are minimal.  The cumulative negative effects continue to percolate until manifesting themselves in a crisis of either withdrawal or death.

The U.S. and world economies are dying. Maybe it is not apparent to some, but it will be soon. The worst part is that a painful withdrawal is no longer an option.

As time marches on, the effects of government inflation will become more extreme and more unpredictable.  And the loss of purchasing power in the US dollar will reflect that.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

Inflation – How It Started And Where We Are Now

INFLATION – HOW IT ALL STARTED

Early ruling monarchs would ‘clip’ small pieces of the coins they accumulated through taxes and other levies against their subjects. The clipped pieces were melted down and fabricated into new coins. All of the coins were then returned to circulation. The clipped coins circulated side by side with other coins and all were assumed to be equal in value.

As the process evolved, more and more clipped coins showed up in circulation. People became suspicious and were reluctant to accept the clipped coins at full face value. Their concern prompted the ruling powers to reduce the precious metal content of the coins. This lowered the cost to fabricate and issue new coins. Soon, all of the coins in circulation had less precious metal content. Hence, there was no need to clip the coins anymore.

From the above example it is not hard to see how anything used as money could be altered in some way to satisfy the voracious financial appetite of government. However, a process such as this was cumbersome and inconvenient. There had to be a better way. Unfortunately, there was.

ENTER: PAPER MONEY

With the advent of the printing press and continued improvements to the mechanics of replicating words and numbers in an easily recognizable fashion, paper money was a big boost to government’s propensity to inflate the money supply.

However, people viewed the paper money with healthy skepticism. They preferred the old coins with precious metal content which continued to circulate alongside the new paper money. As a result, it was necessary for government to maintain a link between money of known value (coins) vs. money of no value (paper notes) in order to encourage its use.

The link is called convertibility. It allows the circulating mediums of money to be interchangeable, i.e., exchanged on demand for predetermined amounts. In the case of the U.S. dollar, the predetermined ratio was one ounce of gold @ $20.67 oz. You could exchange paper dollars for gold; or, gold for paper dollars – on demand. (see Gold Convertibility – NOT Gold Backing)

Convertibility tempered the anxiety of consumers regarding the use and acceptance of paper money. As long as convertibility was maintained by government, the acceptance of paper money grew. Over time, though, governments continued to inflate their own money supply far beyond their ability to continue exchange/convertibility at the agreed upon fixed rate. This cheapened the value of the paper money and caused people to actively avoid it; preferring instead to use and own precious metal coins.

To protect its own interests, government severed the link of convertibility; partially at first, then completely. It was done by fiat (a decree or order of government).

Not only does our money today have no intrinsic value. The supply of money is inflated (and, therefore, debased) continuously. Fractional-reserve banking (no reserve requirements since 2020!) allows exponential expansion of the money supply via credit. The printing press is still humming 24/7, but the digital age has ushered in new and ingenious ways to fool the people.

WHAT IS INFLATION? 

Inflation is the debasement of money by government and central banks via expansion of the supply of money and credit. All governments intentionally inflate and destroy their own currencies.

Inflation cheapens the value of all the money in circulation which leads to a loss of purchasing power in the currency. The loss of purchasing power shows up in higher prices for goods and services. The higher prices are NOT inflation. The higher prices which result from the loss of purchasing power in the currency are the effects of inflation.

There are other effects of inflation including misinterpretation of financial statistics, misallocation of money and resources, unreliable economic statistics and projections, etc.

The effects of inflation are cumulative, volatile, and unpredictable and are the result of inflation that was already created by the government or central bank.

WHO/WHAT CAUSES INFLATION? 

There is only one cause of inflation: government.  The term government includes central banks. The United States Federal Reserve Bank is the biggest inflation engine in world history.  The Fed’s conscious and deliberate action to inflate the money supply since its inception in 1913 has brought about a ninety-nine percent decline in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar. This means that it costs more than one hundred times as much today for what we buy as would be necessary absent the effects of inflation.

Inflation is not caused by “greedy” businesses, excessive wage demands, accelerated consumer spending, or higher energy prices.  Even government’s own propensity to spend, as reckless as it is, does not cause inflation. And that does not contradict my earlier statement that government is the only cause of inflation. The creation of the money comes first. Only after the money or credit is created can the government exercise its wanton disregard for financial restraint by spending its ill-gotten gains. (see Government Spending Is NOT Inflationary)

UNDERSTANDING INFLATION AND ITS EFFECTS

The Arab Oil Embargo in 1973 by OPEC (Organization Of Petroleum Exporting Countries) was prompted by demands for more money for oil. The underlying fact of the matter was that the dollars being received for oil by OPEC nations were worth much less than when existing contractual agreements were originally written. Oil exporters were receiving fixed-dollar amounts in currency that had been losing value for several decades.

To understand this better, imagine that you were a company selling widgets for $1 each and according to your contract you cannot receive any more than that. Fast forward twenty or thirty years. You are still selling lots of widgets and still receiving $1 for each one you sell.  Your production costs over the years have continued to climb; and, it costs you more for everything you buy to maintain your standard of living. Everyone is paying more for everything. On an ongoing, year-to-year basis, things seem reasonably normal, except that prices are now rising more frequently and the rate of increase is higher than before. What is going on?

The effects of inflation are showing up.  Those effects can be subtle at first, or not noticed at all. At some point in time, though, the cumulative effects of inflation become more obvious and everyone starts acting differently.  Businesses try to plan for it and individuals invest with inflation in mind.

As people become more aware of the effects of inflation, they start looking for reasons; and, for guilty parties.  Government is quick to act of course.  Sometimes they implement wage and price controls.  This is like setting the stove burner on ‘high’ and putting a lid on the pot with no release for the pressure.  The Federal Reserve’s favorite ‘tool’ is manipulation of interest rates, both up and down (see Two Reasons The Fed Manipulates Interest Rates  and The Fed’s 2% Inflation Target Is Pointless). And, they talk a lot.

They have talked enough over the past thirty years to frighten us into thinking that our own spending and saving habits are the problem.  Sometimes the blame is directed at foreign countries and their currencies. Our sense of ‘unfairness’ over China’s attempts to weaken the Yuan seem to be misplaced. We criticize them and other countries for doing the same things the US government and Federal Reserve have been doing for over one hundred years.

Even with the hugely, inflationary response of the Federal Reserve in 2008 and afterwards, we did not see the substantial increase in the general level of prices for goods and services that was expected.  It took more than a full decade to see economic activity get back to pre-Great Recession levels.  Then, the pandemic scare and a forced economic shutdown hit. Government and the Federal Reserve embarked on another grand scheme to save us from the effects of inflation which they had created. This time, the higher prices for goods and services showed up quickly and in large measure.

Below is a chart (source) of inflation’s effects on U.S. dollar purchasing power (CPI). To whatever extent the statistic might be flawed (it is), it still is reasonably representative of the effects of inflation over time…

Historical CPI Rate 1914-2024

We can see on the chart that the annual CPI rate is under 5% almost eighty percent of the time and that prices actually dropped about ten percent of the time (red years 1920’s, 1930’s). The potential for volatility increases, though, because of the cumulative effects of inflation.

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF INFLATION 

The first year pictured on the chart is 1914, one year after the inception (1913) of the Federal Reserve. Prices rose by one percent in 1914, followed by a rise of almost two percent in 1915.

Now, imagine that the two percent rise in 1915 was stacked on top of the one percent rise in 1914, followed by each subsequent year being posted similarly. Each succeeding year adds to the height of the first and only column.

The exceptions to the continually increasing height are the years shown in red, which result in reducing the effects of inflation and decreasing the height of the column temporarily.

After a more than one hundred years of inflation, the single column won’t fit on a single page, if we use the same scale as in the horizontal bar chart above.

The cumulative effects of a century of inflation are thus: the U.S. dollar has lost ninety-nine percent of its purchasing power. That means that it takes one hundred times as much for the goods and services we buy as it would without the effects of inflation.

WHERE WE ARE NOW 

In a very real sense, the U.S. dollar has already collapsed. Nearly all of the dollar’s loss of purchasing power has occurred since the depths of the Great Depression in the 1930s. As much as the Federal Reserve might prefer otherwise, most of its time is spent reacting to the cumulative, more extreme effects of the inflation they have created for more than one hundred years.

When the Fed chair talks about “reducing inflation”, what he means is that the Fed is trying to control the effects of inflation which the Fed, itself, has been creating since its inception in 1913. Interest rate manipulation might affect the activity of consumers and investors in negative ways that exacerbate current problems and/or cause other problems. The announced intention about “fighting inflation” by raising interest rates will likely have unintended consequences that overwhelm any efforts and intentions to restore stability.

A certain amount of inflation is necessary to keep the economy from collapsing. Originally, a little bit of inflation was seen as a stimulant to economic activity and productivity; now it has become a necessity. Keeping the wheels greased can keep the slowly moving wagon in motion. At some point, though, the wheels will come off.

The situation is very similar to that which is experienced by drug addicts. Each successive fix requires a stronger dose and any positive effects are minimal.  The cumulative negative effects continue to percolate until manifesting themselves in a crisis of either withdrawal or death.

The U.S. and world economies are dying. Maybe it is not apparent to some, but it will be soon. The worst part is that a painful withdrawal is no longer an option.

As time marches on, the effects of government inflation will become more extreme and more unpredictable.  And the loss of purchasing power in the US dollar will reflect that.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

 

Investors Are Forever Blowing Bubbles

INVESTORS BLOW BIGGER BUBBLES 

(source)

“Blowing soap bubbles is child’s (investor’s?) play, but surprisingly, physicists (economists?) haven’t worked out the details of the phenomenon.” (source)

After all-time closing highs in both the Nasdaq and S&P 500 yesterday, investors drove both indexes higher again today following the release of the latest CPI number and the Fed’s decision to leave their target Fed funds rate unchanged for now. The bond market followed suit with bond prices increasing and the 10-year yield dropping to its lowest level in more than two months.

Read more

Economic Growth Or Dead Cat Bounce?

WHAT ECONOMIC GROWTH?

From its low in 2020, the economy seems to have rebounded reasonably well, generally speaking. Net of the effects of both inflation and higher interest rates, reported statistics seem to indicate that the economy is growing, albeit slowly at times.  Setting aside temporarily the issues of accuracy, revisions, and manipulation, there is plausible evidence of economic growth.

However, a spate of recent announcements by major retailers says that momentum and direction is changing. Target, Walmart, and Walgreens highlight the list of firms that are taking conscious and deliberate action (broad-based price cuts) to attract and encourage increases in customer traffic. Spending, particularly discretionary spending, has declined measurably. (see Thoughts About Target, Retail Sales, And The Economy )

There is also evidence that large firms worldwide are clamping down on employee expenses; namely, travel and entertainment. Cost control is coming back with a vengeance. Question: Are these the delayed effects of serious damage that was inflicted during the forced shutdown of the economy four years ago? If so, might what has been presumed to be potential resumption of a long-term economic growth trend be considered a “dead cat bounce”?

DEAD CAT BOUNCE

A dead cat bounce is a temporary, short-lived recovery of asset prices from a prolonged decline or a bear market that is followed by the continuation of the downtrend. Frequently, downtrends are interrupted by brief periods of recovery—or small rallies—during which prices temporarily rise.

The name “dead cat bounce” is based on the notion that even a dead cat will bounce if it falls far enough and fast enough. (Investopedia)

For our purpose, we are not referring specifically to asset prices, but to economic activity. In order to see if the term applies in this case, or has merit, let’s look at some charts (source) of economic activity. Below are four charts which can be considered indications of economic activity. The shaded areas are recessions. I will make some comments after each chart and then talk about how the term “dead cat bounce” might apply and discuss some possible implications.

Durable Goods Orders (inflation-adjusted) Historical Chart

It is apparent from this chart that people are spending less ‘real’ money on cars, boats, televisions, and appliances. The declining, long-term trend in durable goods orders dates back twenty-five years. Since peaking in 1999, the “prolonged decline” has been interrupted by three “temporary, short-lived” recoveries which were each followed by a “continuation of the downtrend”. Sounds like dead cat bounce(s) to me. Question: How many times can a dead cat bounce?

Capacity Utilization Rate (percentage) – 50 Year Historical Chart

Capacity Utilization refers to the percentage of “resources used by corporations and factories to produce goods in manufacturing, mining, and electric and gas utilities for all facilities located in the United States” (source).  As the rate continues to decline it indicates that production plants and factories are being used less; and, more of them are sitting idle. The long-term decline in capacity utilization dates back to the late 1960’s and is more than six decades old. There are five dead cat bounces which are followed by continuations of the downtrend to new lows.

Auto and Light Truck Sales (number of units) Historical Chart

In the case of auto and light truck sales the volume peak came at the turn of the century. There are two cases since then which could be considered indicative of the term dead cat bounce. While a long-term decline in sales isn’t clearly apparent, neither is there any evidence of a long-term increase. There is, however, a great deal of volatility; past and potential.

Housing Starts (number of units) Historical Chart

The peak in housing starts came in the early 1970s. Since then, there have been four instances of extreme lows followed by extended bursts of activity (“if you build it, they will buy it”).  The chart refers to actual construction starts – not sales, not prices, not units under construction, etc. The long-term trend for housing starts is down and the periods of increase are followed by a resumption of the long-term declining trend. That fits the definition of dead cat bounce.

CONCLUSION 

Long-term economic growth most likely stopped twenty-five years ago at the end of the most productive and prosperous period in U.S. and World history. Since then there has been a series of ups and downs which have taken us broadly lower as far as productivity, abundance, and growth are concerned. Overall quality of goods and services are questionable and customer satisfaction is missing.

Indications that long-term growth is a thing of the past are evidenced by the frequent reversals and declining trends in economic activity shown on the charts above. The latest focus of consumers and retailers on discretionary spending, price conscious actions and policies, customer satisfaction surveys, etc. are warnings that all is not well.

Moreover, what is presumed to be economic growth is not growth at all. Measured progress refers to efforts attempted to recover what was lost and return to where we were before the most recent crisis occurred (pre-Covid; pre-2008 Great Recession, etc.).

The past four years have been highlighted by increases in the effects of inflation, rising interest rates, overblown asset prices, and a general decline in economic activity. Slow growth/no growth is about the best we can hope for. As far as dead cat bounces go, the next one won’t come until after the cat “falls far enough and fast enough”.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!