Showing posts with label strong dollar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label strong dollar. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

IEA revises down 2015 oil demand growth by 20%, a third of British oilers in big trouble, mostly smaller

Andrew Critchlow reported Dec. 12th here:

The International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Friday that world demand for oil will grow by 900,000 barrels per day (bpd) next year, a downward revision of 230,000 bpd from its previous estimate.

The Paris-based watchdog now expects world demand to reach 93.3m bpd in 2015. The agency said: "A strong dollar and the lifting of subsidies have so far limited supportive price effects on demand."

And here on the 29th:

A third of Britain’s listed oil and gas companies are in danger of running out of working capital and even going bankrupt amid a slump in the value of crude, according to new research.

Financial risk management group Company Watch believes that 70pc of the UK’s publicly listed oil exploration and production companies are now unprofitable, racking up significant losses in the region of £1.8bn.



Tuesday, December 23, 2014

The dollar is trading above 90 today

The dollar is trading above 90 today, for the first time since early 2006.

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Told ya: Exports decline 1.5% in September, imports at record levels, signaling GDP of 3.5% will be revised lower

And to think just five days ago our masters of deception had no idea this was coming. As usual, this was unexpected.

Reported here:

The U.S. trade deficit unexpectedly widened in September as exports hit a five-month low, suggesting slowing global demand could undercut economic growth in the final three months of the year. ...

September's shortfall in the overall trade balance is bigger than the $38.1 billion deficit that the government had assumed in its advance gross domestic product (GDP) estimate for the third quarter published last week. This suggests the 3.5 percent annual growth pace it estimated will probably be trimmed when the government publishes its revisions later this month. Trade was reported to have contributed 1.32 percentage points to GDP growth. Exports in September fell 1.5 percent to $195.59 billion, the lowest since April, a sign that weakening demand in key markets such as China and the euro zone was starting to weigh. ...

Apart from slowing global demand, export growth is seen crimped by a strong dollar, which has so far this year strengthened by about 4 percent against the currencies of the country's main trading partners. ...

Consumer goods imports, however, were the highest on record, as were non-petroleum imports. Imports from China also hit an all-time high, leaving the politically sensitive trade gap at $35.6 billion, the highest on record. Imports from Canada were the highest since July 2008.

Friday, October 17, 2014

The dollar closed tonight at 85.19

The 52-week high was 86.746 on October 3. The 52-week low was 78.906 on May 8, just five months ago.

I don't find that big of a move in so short a space very encouraging yet. A stable price at a high level is better. Let's see what it can do.

Friday, March 28, 2014

Larry Kudlow's Kudlow Report On CNBC Ended Tonight

CNBC posted the farewells here on the day ending the television show's 5-year run, which wraps up 25 years with the network so far.

Kudlow remains affiliated with CNBC in a senior capacity and will appear daytimes on occasion instead of nightly at 7:00 PM.

Kudlow, 66 and an avid tennis player,  has had back problems requiring surgery in the last year, according to his own remarks on his 10:00 AM Saturday radio program on WABCradio.com, where you can download podcasts.

Ending his television program was reportedly his own choice and was made in the interest of slowing down.

Others have pointed to the show's very poor ratings as the reason for ending it, but the show has an enthusiastic and devoted, if not large, following.

The Reaganite supply-sider is known for his belief in free market capitalism as the best path to prosperity, as well as for strong dollar policy, growth oriented economic policies and a militarily strong America which welcomes and befriends others wishing to be free.

Kudlow credits his conversion to Roman Catholicism with helping him overcome a drug and alcohol addiction.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Since 1967 The US Dollar Currency Index Average Is 97.76, But 120 Remains The Gold Standard Benchmark

The US Dollar Currency Index benchmark is really 120 since that is the level which prevailed before the closing of the gold window in 1971, after which the index declined to average 97.76 to date.

Monday, October 7, 2013

Bloomberg's Wrong. Gold Is Actually Fairly Priced Today By 1980 Standards.

Bloomberg says gold is worth half what it was in 1980, here:


After taking inflation into account, gold is worth almost half of what it was in 1980. It reached a then-record $850 that year after U.S. political and financial turmoil in the late 1970s caused a surge in consumer prices. The metal is valued at $464 in 1980 dollars, according to a calculator on the website of the Fed Bank of Minneapolis.

---------------------------------------

Assuming that's true (which it isn't because $850 was a bubble price), theoretically gold has another 45% up to go from today's $1,311 before reaching parity with the 1980 record value of $850. As it happens, that level would be $1,900 an ounce, which we already reached in September 2011.

Since the 1980 high was clearly a bubble price, we may infer that we've already repeated that bubble high in inflation-adjusted terms.

The question is, what's the fair price. The average price in 1980 was about $613, but the low was about  $482. That low today adjusted for inflation is something between $1,140 and $1,340.

Today's last spot price is $1,322.

I'd say gold is about where it should be today, adjusted for inflation relative to 1980.

But 1980 was the blowoff top of a horribly inflationary decade, and gold prices would subsequently sink farther to $300 an ounce. In a fiat currency system dedicated to a strong dollar policy, that's about as low as it gets in the late 20th century floating currency regime. So $300 an ounce in 1985 gets you to only $640 an ounce in 2012 adjusted for inflation, meaning gold needs to fall about 50% from where it is today, if . . . IF! we go back to a strong dollar policy.

Don't hold your breath. They don't believe in it.

Monday, July 29, 2013

Home Prices Still Too High: Nationally 24% Pay More Than Half Their Income On Housing

Case Shiller Home Price Index @multpl.com
Joel Kotkin reflects on the still expensive housing market here:


Ownership levels continue to drop, most notably for minorities, particularly African Americans. Last year, according to the Harvard study, the number of renters in the U.S. rose by a million, accompanied by a net loss of 161,000 homeowners.

This is bad news not only for middle-income Americans but even more so for the poor and renters. The number of renters now paying upward of 50% of their income for housing has risen by 2.5 million since the recession and 6.7 million over the decade. Roughly one in four renters, notes Harvard, are now in this perilous situation. The number of poor renters is growing, but the supply of new affordable housing has dropped over the past year. ...


According to the Center for Housing Policy and National Housing Conference, 39% of working households in the Los Angeles metropolitan area spend more than half their income on housing, 35% in the San Francisco metro area and 31% in the New York area. All of these figures are much higher than the national rate of 24%, which itself is far from tolerable.


-------------------------------------------------

Kotkin nowhere mentions that currently expensive housing is explicit Federal Reserve policy. ZIRP and QE are specifically designed to reduce long term interest rates to make home mortgages affordable. Instead those policies have re-inflated housing prices to their historical highs before the bubble and reversed the downward trajectory of price resetting those prices were on.

In June 2013 dollars, the Case Shiller Home Price Index reached its low point after the bubble at 126.30 for the quarter ended March 31, 2012. That level hadn't been seen since June 1998. But from the long term perspective prices should have reset to 120 on the index or lower as they have in the past. This expectation holds even more considering the excesses of the bubble which needed to be wiped out, but haven't been.

The Fed has done nothing but interfere with the free market in housing, creating the bubble in the first place and preventing its deflation now. To fix the problem, the Fed needs at a minimum to focus solely on price stability by maintaining a strong dollar. Markets will take care of themselves after that.

Sunday, March 31, 2013

The US Dollar Has A Long Way To Go, But The Trend Has Been Up

The US dollar is up for a number of reasons: 

permanency in the tax code effective January 1, 2013;

elevated spending by the federal government arrested, due to PARTISAN gridlock (hurrah!);

and increased US DOMESTIC oil production from technology advances, despite the most anti-oil president ever to sit in the Oval.

Just think where we would be if we actually had a pro-US president.

Well, for one thing, we'd be WORKING, most likely.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

The Purchasing Power of the Dollar Under Post-War Presidents Is A Catastrophe

The purchasing power of the dollar under Truman fell 12 percent in four years (1949-1953).

The purchasing power of the dollar under Eisenhower fell 12 percent in eight years.

The purchasing power of the dollar under Kennedy/Johnson fell 23 percent in eight years.

The purchasing power of the dollar under Nixon/Ford fell 65 percent in eight years (gold convertibility went out the window in 1971).

The purchasing power of the dollar under Jimmy Carter fell 50 percent in four years.

The purchasing power of the dollar under Ronald Reagan fell 36 percent in eight years.

The purchasing power of the dollar under GHW Bush fell 17 percent in four years.

The purchasing power of the dollar under Bill Clinton fell 23 percent in eight years.

The purchasing power of the dollar under GW Bush fell 21 percent in eight years.

Overall, the purchasing power of the dollar has fallen 800 percent in the sixty years between 1949 and 2009. It takes $9 in 2009 to buy what $1 could in 1949.

People like Larry Kudlow who talk about "strong dollar" presidents "like Ronald Reagan" don't know what they are talking about.

We haven't had a single strong dollar president in the post-war period. All eleven have presided over inflationary (monetary) policies which have impoverished the American people.

For the 35 years between 1878 and 1913 the dollar ACTUALLY GAINED A PENNY in its purchasing power, when the dollar was fixed at $20.67 per ounce of gold.

The strong dollar presidents? Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Cleveland, Harrison, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt and Taft.

A different breed of men.

Friday, May 4, 2012

Unemployment Falls to 8.1 Percent, 115K New Jobs

Consensus estimates had new jobs at 170K. Gee, they were off by only 55K this time.

Obama has been president for 39 full months, all of them with unemployment above 8 percent.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the anemic results for April 2012 here:

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 115,000 in April, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 8.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in professional and business services, retail trade, and health care, but declined in transportation and warehousing.

Unemployment in the US in the post-war period seems to get progressively worse only since America jettisoned strong dollar policy under Richard Nixon in 1971, as this graphic from The Wall Street Journal plainly illustrates.



And Obama wants us to go FORWARD with that, which means unemployment will only get worse over the long haul with the likes of him at the helm.

If only forward meant the past, like 1948-1968.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

This is the Way Banks Go 'Round the QE Mulberry Bush

James Hamilton for Fortune here provides an excellent explanation and illustration of how the Federal Reserve "printed" money with which to buy assets from troubled banks, who in turn have kept the "cash" on deposit with the Fed, earning interest, in an effort to re-structure their balance sheets.

Here is an excerpt:

But if the Fed didn't print any money as part of QE2 and earlier asset purchases, how did it pay for the stuff it bought? The answer is that the Fed simply credited the accounts that banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold with the Fed. These electronic credits, or reserve balances, are what has exploded since 2008. The blue area in the graph below is the total currency in circulation, whose growth we have just seen has been pretty modest. The maroon area represents reserves.
















Despite all the rhetoric to the contrary from the Fed, this operation is not designed to stimulate job growth or boost stock prices. It is designed to do one thing and one thing only: rescue the banks.

And don't even think about maintaining a strong dollar.

When that maroon area returns to an imperceptible sliver, if it ever does, you'll know things are back to "normal." Unlike George Bailey who had two dollars left from his two thousand dollar honeymoon stash at the end of that day when there was a run on his bank, the Federal Reserve can theoretically keep on  running this shell game indefinitely. But the consequences for the value of the dollar will be, and are, grave indeed, which makes Mr. Bernanke's warnings to Congress to get its spending under control almost amusing.


Come, sir; come, sir; come, sir; foh, sir! Why, you 
bald-pated, lying rascal, you must be hooded, must 
you? Show your knave's visage, with a pox to you! 
show your sheep-biting face, and be hanged an hour! 
Will't not off?


-- Lucio, in William Shakespeare's Measure for Measure, V, 1

Monday, January 17, 2011

NY Times Paints Loughner and Hard Money Libertarianism as Right Wing Extreme

The leftist ridicule offensive continues, designed to preoccupy the opposition and get the right fighting amongst themselves over who belongs and who doesn't, while the left presses on for new gun control measures and suppression of free speech.

Notice the elision going on in the first passage here:

He became an echo chamber for stray ideas, amplifying, for example, certain grandiose tenets of a number of extremist right-wing groups — including the need for a new money system and the government’s mind-manipulation of the masses through language.

Libertarians generally hold to hard money ideas, but that hardly makes them right wing, witness the long war of traditionalists like Russell Kirk against what he called "the chirping sectaries." The hard money idea is subtly paired with mind-manipulation conspiracy theory by the Times, whatever that means, without support and simply by assertion. Having been a fairly well-informed conservative since the late 70s, one is hard-pressed to know what the Times is even talking about. There you go again, one of our own might say now. We've had our Truthers and our Birthers. Now we've got our Minders, I guess.

One suspects the Times knows full well its only plausible case is in the Libertarian hard money ideology, as here:

A few days later, during a meeting with a school administrator, Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver” — a standard position among right-wing extremist groups. With Mr. Loughner’s consent, that same administrator then arranged to meet with the student and his mother to discuss the creation of a “behavioral contract” for him, after which the official noted: “Throughout the meeting, Jared held himself very rigidly and smiled overtly at inappropriate times.”

Notice the effort to paint gold and silver backed money as "a standard position" on the right. It isn't, and it hasn't been as long as conservatism has been resurgent since the 60s and Milton Friedman style monetarism and devotion to a strong dollar captured people's imaginations.

Clear-headed thinkers on the right, like George Will, have well noted the Federal Reserve's failure to maintain a sound currency partly because its mandate was divided in 1978 to include maintaining full employment. Instead, hard money ideology has been an enthusiasm prevalent on the fringe, among Libertarians, in the post-war era in view of the fact that the monetarist consensus has been breaking down due to its failures, and because the gold standard used to be, well, the law of the land, all the way up until . . . FDR.

The dishonesty of the presentation coheres with the view of the Times that, for most of its history, America has been a veritable right-wing nuthouse. They ought to know.

Thursday, November 5, 2009

"The Feds Have No Faith in Recovery"

Penetrating analysis here from the chief economist at Delta Global Advisors.

November 5, 2009

The Feds Have No Faith in Recovery

By Michael Pento

The stock market has enjoyed a significant rally since the end of the first quarter. The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported last week that the economy grew at a 3.5% annual rate in the third quarter--a figure they achieved by that claiming inflation was running at only a 0.8% annual rate, despite a sharp drop in the dollar, a spike in commodity prices and record highs for gold.

The cyclical bull market in stocks and positive print on GDP has caused some on Wall Street and in Washington to claim the recession has ended. Despite all the good economic news, an end to fiscal and monetary stimulus is nowhere in sight, precisely because policymakers know the happy news is artificially derived.

A closer look indicates that neither the administration nor the Federal Reserve believes its own recovery rhetoric. They understand that the economy will not prosper without continued life support.

I believe removing such artificial stimulus is needed so the country can immediately begin de-leveraging and to prevent the accumulation of yet more baneful debt. What is truly amazing is how many people on Wall Street are foolish enough to postulate that our problems have been solved. The stock market will not be so easily fooled for much longer.

The Great Depression Part II was narrowly averted last year by slashing interest rates to near zero. The Fed made money virtually free because the record level of indebtedness ($34 trillion) in the economy required such low rates so that borrowers could service their obligations. Otherwise a cataclysmic domino effect of defaults and bankruptcies would have occurred. To avoid that scenario, the public sector assumed some of the private sector's debt and then subsequently took on a significant amount more. The debt of the nation continues to increase at a 4.9% annual rate. All public debt is ultimately the responsibility of the private sector to pay off--either directly or through future taxes. As a result, the economy has never been more precarious than it is today.

In spite of this, the stock market appears to be doing quite well. We've seen a 57% rally off the March lows in the S&P 500. However, if you measure the market against other assets its performance is much less impressive. Since the beginning of 2000 the S&P is down about 50% measured in terms of a basket of currencies other than the falling U.S. dollar. The index is down nearly 80% against the real inflation hedge--gold!

The sad truth is that this recent market rally has been produced on the back of a weakening dollar and the slashing of corporate overhead. Cutting payrolls and research and product development projects are not a prescription for sustainable growth. As I like to say, you can't burn your furniture to keep your house warm forever. Eventually, top-line revenue growth must emerge or Wall Street's game of beat-the-expectations will be short lived.

It's also worth noting that a country cannot devalue itself to prosperity and that a bull market cannot survive an inflationary environment for long. In the short run, nominal gains in the averages can occur since everything priced in dollars tends to increase in value. However, the rally will be truncated unless the Fed provides consumers and corporations with a stable currency.

The ramifications of a crumbling currency are vastly misunderstood. A strong dollar is the cornerstone of a healthy economy. It is essential for balanced growth and healthy investment to occur. On the other hand a weak currency decimates the middle class and the corporate sector's ability to maintain earnings growth. Inflation lies behind all infirm currencies, and it is inflation that destroys the purchasing power of consumers. The diminished value of their wallets leaves them with the ability to buy only non-discretionary items. As a direct result, unemployment rates soar and economic output plunges.

I believe we will suffer from a protracted period of stagflation. Money supply, as measured by M2, has increased 5% Y.O.Y. Meanwhile the output of goods and services is falling. As long as the money supply is chasing a shrinking GDP pie, there will be upward pressure on prices.

Making the situation even worse is the manner in which the money supply is growing. The quality of growth is very low because the increase in supply is coming from commercial bank purchases of Treasury debt, rather from an issuance of credit to the private sector for capital goods creation. Total Loans and Leases at Commercial banks are down 8.2% from last year. Meanwhile, the amount of Treasuries held at all commercial banks is up 20% year-on-year.

That means money supply growth is emanating from government's misallocation and redirection of capital. It isn't being loaned out to build mines and factories; it is instead being loaned out to increase consumption and build even more consumer debt.

If the Treasury and Federal Reserve truly believed the economy and the stock market were on a sustainable recovery path, talk of extending and increasing the home buyer's tax credit would be off the table. The Fed would already be reducing the size of the monetary base. The truth, however, is that no one in government really believes in this recovery. If they did, they would be hiking interest rates and the deficit would be shrinking.

The government's realization of our precarious economic condition means its largess will continue. Near term, that may ease some pain. So did the artificial stimulus that gave rise to the housing boom. In the end, a protracted period of a near-zero interest rates, along with endless economic stimulus, will spawn another bubble and not a genuine recovery.

Michael Pento is chief economist at Delta Global Advisors and a contributor to greenfaucet.com.