Male Unemployment is 11.2 Million, Not 4.2 Million

So says Brett Arends, here:

Millions here are still out of work. The unemployment situation is far, far worse than the government is telling you. Forget the official jobless rate, 9%. It’s meaningless. Even the so-called “underemployment” rate doesn’t tell the full story. Consider this: According to the Labor Department, the number of men age 25 to 54 who are out of work is officially 4.2 million. The reality? Deep in the footnotes the Labor Department says there are 61.6 million men in America age 25 to 54, while just 46.7 million are in full-time work. That leaves 14.9 million left over. Another 3.7 million work part-time. Seven million aren’t accounted for at all.

Private Equity Performance Proves Public Markets Are Not Efficient

So says Brett Arends, here:

If you’d invested $100,000 in the Standard and Poor’s 500 index 25 years ago, and stuck it out through all the turmoil that followed, you would have made about $800,000 in profits in return for all your trouble.

Sound good? Try this. If you’d invested in a typical basket of private-equity funds you’d have made $2.1 million. No kidding.

James Altucher Talks Up Optimism, and Five Stocks He Doesn't Own!

Here.

Give me a break! Put your money where your mouth is, bro!

Apple, Exxon Mobil, Walmart, Amazon and Google: This year's dinosaurs are next year's tank of gas. It's happened before, and it will happen again. Maybe not right away, but Steve Jobs will die. The Arabs will try another embargo over Israel. Companies depending on relatively cheap transportation and distribution will experience tighter margins. And we can't predict the future, but a world where energy costs more is a world where electricity usage puts free operations like Google between a rock and a hard place.

On the macro side James Altucher really shows his colors: securitization without mark-to-market. You can't have the one without the other. He must be reading too much Steve Forbes.

Have fun stormin' the castle!

The Economy Is Not The Same Thing As The Market, Or Is It?

Mark Hulbert reminds everyone here that the DOW quadrupled between July 1932 and March 1937.

He thinks analogists should think about that when drawing doomsday scenario parallels. He's surely correct that smart investors could make a lot of money if today's market replays the DOW from that period in The Great Depression.

But that's one hell of a big "if".

I don't buy the analogy.

For one thing, the Shiller p/e ratio then had fallen way below 10 to the near rock bottom levels near 5 once seen in 1920-1921. Today we're still around 19.

And then there's the little matter of GDP.

Having fallen from $103.6 billion in 1929 to $58.7 billion at the end of 1932, GDP began to rise again in 1934, reaching $91.9 billion by the close of 1937. From the GDP low of $56.4 billion in 1933, GDP rose nearly 63 percent in just four years of the DOW's five year cyclical bull recovery in that secular bear during the 1930s. Today growth is mired in the vicinity of 1 percent, after a decade of average annual growth of 1.67 percent. That was a raging fire then. We've only lit a match.

The depression of 2008-2009 was much too small by comparison to 1929-1940 to draw any meaningful parallels: a 46 percent drop in GDP over four years today would mean reducing our $15 trillion economy by nearly $7 trillion. We didn't drop even a half trillion dollars from GDP in 2009. And the last time the p/e ratio got close to the low 1921 and 1932 levels was in 1982.

We've had a little depression. A little growth and a little gain in the markets would seem to follow.

But since government can screw up a two-car funeral, anything is possible. 

Can No One Tell The Truth, Even About The Great Depression?

Seen here:

Between 1929 and 1933, U.S. gross domestic product contracted by around 30%.

Where the hell does that come from?

In 1929 GDP was $103.6 billion. By the end of 1933 GDP had declined to $56.4 billion. That's a decline of over 45 percent, not "around 30 percent."

Matthew Lynn for Marketwatch.com is talking about "the buying opportunity of a lifetime" at the link.

Really? With the Shiller price-to-earnings ratio at 20.43?

The buying opportunity of my lifetime was between 1973 and 1983, when the Shiller p/e ratio rattled around 10, fifty percent lower than it is today. And it just so happens that I didn't have any money to invest in those years like I do today because of a lifetime of saving.

Not even March 2009 was the buying opportunity of a lifetime, when the Shiller p/e fell to around 15.

If you are wise you will keep your powder dry until you see the whites in their eyes, so to speak, when we get to 10. But even then, can you live with yourself if you pull the trigger and then a total market collapse like 1929 brings the p/e closer to 5?

Well, can ya?

Remember the one true thing of Keynesianism: markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. A decline from 10 to 5 can wipe out 50 percent of what you have.

There is nothing which cannot repeat itself, because human nature does not change.

American Money Market Funds Pull Back Amid Growing Distrust of Europe

Jon Markman reports on one of the negative feedback loops threatening another credit crash as observed by Satyajit Das, here:

American money market funds, which manage around $1.6 trillion, historically invested around 40 percent, or $600 billion to $700 billion, with European financial institutions. Over the last few months, the money market funds have reduced their exposure to European entities. The funds have also decreased the term of their loans to the European entities that they are willing deal with to as little as seven days at a time, in an effort to limit risk, Das said.

For Mockery of Fiscal Conservatism, You Can't Beat MarketWatch

As here.

Being a commie must be a line item check-off on the job application. 

When the counter-revolution comes, those guys better watch out.

Q1 Non-Bank Corporate Debt Surged to a Record $7.3 Trillion

And Brett Arends, same article, thinks corporations used the borrowing to finance the stock buy-backs, which kind of puts the taint on both their stocks and their bonds:

The total [borrowing] at the end of 2007, at the peak of the so-called “credit bubble,” was just $6.7 trillion.

This borrowing spree has pushed overall gearing for nonfarm, nonfinancial corporates to hefty levels. The Fed says that U.S. nonfinancial corporates now have debt equal to 50% of their net worth. It’s near record levels for modern times. As recently as 2006, it was just 40%.

When a company borrows money to bolster its own stock price, it makes me wary of the bonds. When the executives aren’t even willing to invest their own money, it doesn’t exactly make me enthusiastic about the stock either. 

Q1 SPX Rise of 5 Percent: Companies Painted The Tape

Just like they're doing in the last three days, along with everyone else, to make Q2 look better after a tough couple of months.

Brett Arends has the story here:

So who was driving up the market? What was creating this boom?

Turns out it was the companies themselves. TrimTabs says companies spent a thumping $124 billion in the first three months of the year trying to boost their share prices by buying up stock.

That works out at about $2 billion for every day the market opened.

Meanwhile, according to Trim Tabs, guess who avoided buying stock during the first quarter? Company executives. The “insiders.”

Phony as a $3 bill.

Why Hold Bonds in Tax Protected Accounts and Stocks Outside Them?

"Bond coupons are taxed as ordinary income. Stock dividends are taxed more lightly."

-- Brett Arends, here, on a completely different topic.

Cutting Spending: Tea Party's Meession from G-d

As reported by Howard Gold here:

Congress has raised the debt limit 74 times since 1962 so the federal government can meet its obligations.

Usually it’s just a rubber-stamp exercise. But this time a Republican-controlled House of Representatives, which swept into power on the back of the Tea Party movement, is preparing to take a stand against too much federal spending and picked the debt ceiling as the battleground.

[Greg] Valliere [chief political strategist of Potomac Research Group] called the 87 freshman Tea Party House Republicans “unlike any group I’ve ever seen in my career. These people don’t give a damn about being re-elected. They feel they are on a mission from God to cut spending,” he told me.

Housing Price Declines About 6.5 Percent Worse Than Great Depression

As reported here, quoting Paul Dales, senior economist at Capital Economics:

“On the Case-Shiller measure, prices are now 33% below the 2006 peak and are back at a level last seen in the third quarter of 2002. This means that prices have now fallen by more than the 31% decline endured during the Great Depression.”

The article concludes that it is probably even worse than that, if current modest inflation is factored in compared to the  deflation prevalent in the 1930s. 

Years of Blood, Sweat Equity, and Tears . . . Gone: Home Equity Down $7 Trillion Since 2006

The Nutter feels your pain:

Since early 2006, American families have lost $7 trillion in home equity — more than half of their equity has simply vanished. Many millions, of course, have lost everything they put into their house, and more.

Years of blood, tears and sweat equity gone. Remember, for most families, home equity accounts for most of their wealth. In the past, wealth in the form of home equity has often been the ticket to upward mobility; many a small business or college education has been funded from real estate wealth.

About 11 million families — about 23% of those with mortgages — now owe more on their house than it’s worth. Before the bubble burst, that figure was about 1%.

More from Rex here.

Apathy Precedes Bull Markets, Not Fear

The secular bull market in gold since 2001 is coincident with a secular bear market in stocks since 2000, if this November 30, 2009 analysis by Brett Arends for The Wall Street Journal is correct.

 

The current stock market rally is therefore a cyclical bull market within the long term bear market, which at present elevated levels is ground where angels fear to tread, or ought to, as the title "Gold Run a Reason to be Wary of the Stock Market" suggests:

The booming gold price is making me very nervous. About Wall Street.

Why? Because gold's rocketing boom -- it's risen from around $260 an ounce about a decade ago to just under $1,200 now -- is a vivid daily example of what a real bull market looks like. ...

Looking back to early March, there certainly was a lot of panic and capitulation, which you usually see at a market bottom. People talked of a new "Great Depression." One thing I noted at the time was that investors were shying away even from rock-solid defensive stocks with big, well-protected dividend yields. People weren't just scared; they were petrified.

Is that really how a massive bear market usually ends?

The last example before our eyes was gold, whose big bear market ended a decade ago. It looked very different.

Like shares in the 1930s and the early 1980s, gold ended its secular bear market in 1999-2001 with a whimper, not a bang. People didn't panic; they simply lost interest.


Read the rest at the link.