Effor.com

I haven’t posted in what seems like forever.  It’s a combination of work and a lot going on personally, but really just apathy on my part.  I’m spending a lot of time on fantasy football and stuff with my kids, and I hate saying the same things over and over in a different way.  “Yes Johnny, the government is getting bigger each and every day and I think it sucks.”  That’s the basic message of most of what I have to say.

But I read a post from The Daily Reckoning today that made quite a bit of sense in looking at the future in an optimistic light by comparing it to what we faced in the 1970’s.  I’ve copied it here because it’s worth reading to put things into perspective.  Enjoy!

gk

And finally today, back to Bill…

Our old friend John Mauldin answered last week’s note. Our point was that our children face a different world than we did. From what we can make out, it will be a tougher world. Everything was looking up with the baby boomers. Especially in the lives of the luckiest of them – your editor and John included. Is everything still going up? The US economy? The power and wealth of the US empire? And how about our children? John and I started out with nothing to lose. Our children can slip down as well as slide up. John has today’s Daily Endnote for us. Please enjoy…

It’s More Than Half Full.

Ok, Bill, let’s review those wonderful days from whence we sprang, so fraught with the advantages of having nothing. So potent with opportunity. It was the middle of the ’70s when we started our careers. Inflation was high and rising. The Soviets were seen as a major threat. Japan was beating our brains out and buying everything, even if nailed down (like Pebble Beach and New York skyscrapers). I had to borrow money at 15% (or more) to buy paper in order to meet customer demands for printing. And guess what? The banks got into trouble and called loans willy-nilly. (My bank even called my mother and threatened her to pay my loan – against written agreements – and she did. Evil sons of bitches. The more things change… And they delightedly did fail! Not that I hold a grudge.)

There were multiple successive and deeper recessions. Gold was rising as the dollar was seen as a joke. Howard Ruff (a good friend to both of us when we were starting out!) and almost every newsletter writer were telling people to buy gold and freeze-dried food to protect themselves against a near certain economic, if not apocalyptic, catastrophe. Unemployment was high and rising for a decade.

The correct answer to the question, “Where will the jobs come from?” back then was “I don’t know, but they will.” And it is the correct answer today.

In 20 years, no one will want to come back to the halcyon days of 2005. Our kids (all 13 of them) are getting ready to live through what will be the most exciting period in human history. There will be a century’s worth of change, measured by the standard of the 20th century, just in the next ten years, and then we will double that pace in the next ten after that. Medical miracles that will mean our kids and grandkids will live a lot longer than their dads, although I intend to be writing well into my 80s, like our mutual hero Richard Russell.

There will be whole new industries developed in the US. How do I know that? Follow the money. The rest of the world spends a fraction on research and development that we do. Where do you go if you are looking for venture capital?

Do I care if the Chinese and the “developing” worlds are far better off, relatively speaking, than the US in 20 years? Not a whit. Good on them. I hope they make discoveries and inventions and new businesses that benefit us all. But we are not going into some long dark night. We, and our kids, get to choose how we respond to what is the reality of the day.

Our nation had to almost hit the wall in 1980 before a Volker could come along and force us to take the pain of recessions to beat back inflation. And we will have to come perilously close to the wall this time before we take action as a nation. Way to close for comfort. Maybe you are right, and we have a soft depression. I hope not, but even so, the world will be better, far better, in 20 years, with far more opportunities than today.

It was not fun starting new businesses in the ’70s and early ’80s. But we did. I remember coming to Baltimore and being (literally) afraid to get out of the car to visit your offices in the slums. But that was what you could afford. A far cry from the chateau in Ouzilly.

I lived in a small mobile home. Tiffani was born there, and we converted part of the kitchen to be her bedroom. (Yes, I was white “trailer trash.”) But I got up every morning just like you did and killed as many alligators as I could. The rest had to wait till the next day.

And that is the legacy our kids have. They know what it is to wade into the swamp every morning. Never quitting. In thinking about this, you may be the father I respect the most. You have raised your kids to be multi-lingual children of the world. What a work ethic. How did you get them to scrape window shutters at your chateaus? (I actually saw this, and my kids marveled.

Thereafter I threatened to make them go live with you when they did not act right!)

You have given your kids the opportunity to follow their dreams, even demanded that they do so. And such dreams they (and mine) have. Will they succeed? Who knows? But they will go at it with gusto, in a world with more opportunities than you and I ever imagined 40 years ago. And, oh boy, were we optimists back then. How else could we have done what we did? If we believed the rhetoric that the world was coming to an end, would we have dared to venture out?

You cannot have raised your kids to be such bold adventurers without instilling in them a certain high level of optimism. I am going to out you, Mr. Bonner. You present yourself to your readers as a bona fide end of the world pessimist. But you are a really and truly a closet optimist. Your whole business empire (and what an empire it has become!) is based on finding people who are optimists, in the sense that they think they can actually get people to send them money for what they write. Which they do! Even if it is to read why the world will come to an end, which it thankfully never does.

You are right in this: it is personal gumption that makes or breaks us. There are those who started out with less than we did (hard to imagine but true) and made a lot more. And there are those who started out with far more and made less. But there are very few who are happier than either of us. Or luckier.

Our kids? It is not the times which dictate the man (or daughter!), but the response of the man which dictates his own time. Today has a brighter future for someone young than any other time in history, whether they are in the US or Brazil or China. They just have to seize it.

And as our kids do just that, and as the millions of kids of those who read us do so, and the billions of kids who are just now getting ready to bust loose all work to achieve their dreams, the world is going to be a far more fantastic place. Smooth ride? Not a chance. We didn’t get one, and in thinking through history, there have not been many smooth rides. Why should we think we will get any better? Our kids will just have to live with our generational (and individual) iniquities, government debt and all, and figure out how to master their own fates. But if I had a choice to take the ’70s or today? In less than a heart’s beat I choose today. And I bet you would too!

Regards,

John Mauldin
for The Daily Reckoning

Share on Facebook

Today’s Daily Reckoning had a good piece (as usual) from Bill Bonner.  He had an imaginary conversation with Tim Geithner about how to handle the debt bubble.  I wish I would have thought of that, but I’m not known for being original.    Here’s part of the conversation where Tim calls up Bill and asks for Bill’s advice:

“We need to recognize, first, that this is not just a regular recession. So you can forget the usual recession remedies – a few points off the Fed funds rate…a little counter-cyclical fiscal spending. This is much more serious.

“What we have here is a depression. It’s a depression because it requires a fundamental restructuring of the international financial model. You know how it worked during the Bubble Epoch; Asians made things…Americans bought them. Asians made money; Americans spent it. Asians saved; Americans borrowed. And now the Asians have money; and Americans have debts. Not really very complicated, is it?

“Well, these programs of trying to bailout businesses…and the banks…and the economy…you can see how they are all a waste of money. All of these efforts are trying to revive the old model. They’re trying to free up credit so that Americans can buy more! Now, we don’t really have to explain why that won’t work, do we? More debt won’t do Americans any good; more IOUs from Americans won’t do China any good.

“Instead, the model has to be taken apart and reconstructed. China needs to sell more to people with money – its own people, mainly. Americans need to pay down their debts before they can take up serious consumption again.”

“But wait, Bill,” Mr. Geithner interrupted. “Won’t that cause serious disruptions? When Americans save, in order to reduce their debts, they take away the single primary source of demand for the world economy. If they don’t begin buying soon, businesses all over the world will go broke. That’s why I’ve spent so much money trying to bail out the banks. Americans have no money. So the only way they can spend is if the banks provide credit. So, we have to save the banks first…then they’ll begin lending…and then the economy can begin growing again.”

“Uh…no. That’s not how it works. Even if you make all the banks solvent, whom are they going to lend to? Who’s going to borrow? Americans have too much debt already. Right now, if they get any money, they’re holding onto it…and using it to pay down their debts. They’re not going to start spending just because a bank offers them a loan.

Good stuff!  One thing that Bill left out is the power of savings.  Americans don’t have any savings to speak of, that’s why our government needs to borrow from China and Japan.  When the government ran up huge debts during the Depression and WWII, American citizens were the people who provided that money.  They provided it from savings, and we don’t have the money to do that today.

So when we purchase something made in China (or Germany) we have to effectively borrow that money in order to buy it.  That’s what a trade deficit does over time.  Wealth is extracted from the country with the deficit, and it flows into the country with the surplus.  It’s not rocket science.

Note – I am NOT suggesting that we pass protectionist measures to combat the trade deficit.  The fix to that is to simply live within our means and only purchase what we can afford.  That means paying as you go.  No new debt.  Pay down the old debt and save actual money.  When the debt is gone, people can once again buy more things – as long as they pay for it.

Robert Heinlein wasn’t the first to say it, but he said TANSTAAFL in a way that I remember it.  “There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch”.  He’s right, and we’re finding that out in the US now.

I’m currently re-reading volume one of The Story of Civilization. “Our Oriental Heritage” and it’s amazing how many times throughout history that government (and people) think they can rewrite the laws of nature.  Supply and demand is one of those laws, and no amount of wishful thinking and no amount of new regulations is going to change it.  The countries that have tried it in the past are gone.

I fear we’re following rapidly down that well trodden path.  I wish that weren’t the case, but idiots keep voting for bread and circuses.  Unless that changes, we’re going downhill.

gk

Share on Facebook

This is a hilarious article – with a serious message – from Bill Bonner of The Daily Reckoning.  I received it in their daily email, but I cannot find it on the Daily Reckoning site right now.  I’ll post a link to the article if I find it later.

Mr. Bonner -  I’m going to post a copy of the the article here.  Please let me know if you’d prefer if I excerpted it – which I’d do now if I could find a link to the full article. 

Enjoy the article – it’s Bill Bonner at his sarcastic best!

gk

Yes We Can’t!
By Bill Bonner
Paris, France

Free market capitalism is the “god that failed,” writes Martin Wolf. Thus does Financial Times lead off a feeble chorus of lament in its “Future of Capitalism” series. What do we do now? is the question. Can capitalism be tamed? Can it be harnessed? “Yes we can!” says America’s president.

Richard Layard from the London School of Economics, offered a way forward:

“We should stop the worship of money and create a more human society,” he writes. “Happiness has not risen since the 1950s in the US or Britain,” he points out, despite big increases in wealth. “Modern happiness research can help find answers,” he believes.

“Old fashioned socialist planning is the only coherent alternative to a collapsing capitalist economy,” an alert FT reader added.

Given the depth of these insights, we decided not to dive into this discussion headfirst. Instead, we will simply mock the swimmers from the bank. Brazil’s president, Lula da Silva, for example, could only come up with a campaign slogan: “The future of human beings is what really matters.” But who can blame them? They want a capitalism that makes people happy…fairer, gentler, greener… they want to reform it…to housebreak it…to cut its balls off so they can safely put it on a leash and introduce it to their daughters.

But they miss the point of it altogether: we can’t reform capitalism; it reforms us. Capitalism punishes mistakes and rewards virtue (or good luck) – not necessarily quickly or gently…but roughly and imperfectly, like a hanging judge in a frontier town. On paper, of course, we can do better. Imagine a world where public employees are saints and geniuses who do such a swell job of allocating capital we want for nothing. But then, when we get a chance to see them in action, we find that they are bigger rascals than the capitalists themselves.

This week, under pressure from its new proprietor – the U.S. government – AIG released a list showing who had gotten more than $100 billion of its bailout money. At the top of the list of recipients was a familiar name – Goldman Sachs. In a truly astonishing co-incidence, Goldman is the firm that had been run by the very person who headed up the AIG rescue – former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. And what serendipity! Lloyd Bankfein – Goldman’s top man now – was actually in the room with the feds when the AIG rescue plan was put together.

In the room; in the deal. But the big scalawags ducked out of the press almost immediately. Instead, the headlines focused on the small fry. AIG paid bonuses of $450 million – some charged it was $1 billion – to its executives. These guys shouldn’t get bonuses, came the popular outcry; they should get a firing squad.

You’ll recall the story. The insurance giant AIG lost money on a series of gambles. For example, it gambled that it could insure the mortgage payments of people who couldn’t afford to buy a house. During the bubble years, people bought houses at outrageous prices. They could borrow 80% of the purchase price from government-backed debt mongers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Buyers were supposed to put up the other 20% themselves, giving lenders a margin of safety in case the transactions didn’t work out as planned. But, if an insurance company would guarantee the other 20%, Fannie could cover 100% of this “enhanced” mortgage loan. AIG found that insuring this part of the loan was profitable – as long as nobody asked questions. But then the market price for the collateral dropped – by as much as 50% in some areas. Suddenly, people were walking away from their houses. Defaults on these “enhanced” loans ran at 5 times the rates on normal Fannie-backed mortgages.

An ordinary person would look at these facts and pronounce the same judgment as the capitalist market: AIG and Fannie both deserve to go broke. But give him enough higher education in the economics department, or a job in government, and the fool rushes in –with someone else’s money.

In the theory of bailouts, an ailing firm is given a helping hand when it needs it. This gives it time to get back on its feet, and prevents it from dragging down its employees, lenders, investors and counterparties. But what actually happens is much simpler. Money is goes from the pocket of the person who earned it…to the pocket of someone who didn’t…from the innocent bystander to the fellow who caused the accident. Capitalism takes money away from erring capitalists; the capitalism improvers give it back to them.

And who decides who gets the loot? Ah…as soon as you hold them up to the light, the angels’ wings fall off. By and large, these are the same cherubim and seraphim – such as Hank Paulson – who were supposed to be leading…regulating…and controlling capitalism when it ran into a ditch. Not a single one raised a warning. Instead, they whooped for the free market and passed the whiskey bottle to the driver! And now, thanks to their bailouts, AIG continues writing insurance against mortgage loans. Seventy-three AIG executives continue getting $1 million bonuses. A long line of reckless counterparties goes unpunished. And Hank Paulson offers advice to Financial Times readers on how to make capitalism work better.

But that is always the problem with improving capitalism…even in the slapstick American way. The reformers promise a ‘new deal,’ but they’ve always got an ace up their sleeve somewhere.

Enjoy your weekend,

Bill Bonner
The Daily Reckoning

Share on Facebook

It’s a cool rainy day in Knoxville, so I’ve been catching up on my reading.  Yesterday’s Daily Reckoning had a great article titled “How to Save the World” and I want to post a bit of it here with some comments, because it sums up the cause – and the solution – to the economic train wreck we’re all watching.

I like this line: It is not often that we are called upon to advise the world’s government. In fact, we can’t remember a single time. But we can’t resist a lost cause. So, we offer the Daily Reckoning Plan to Save the World, or DRPtStW for short.

Humor like that always make Bill Bonner’s articles a great read.

Just read the Financial Times. This week it has a windy series on the “Future of Capitalism,” inviting readers to imagine how the decaying old creed might be reformed. Alas, for capitalism, it’s out of the frying pan, into the toilet. Larry Summers, Obama’s number one financial advisor, voiced the prevailing view: “This notion that the economy is self-stabilizing is usually right, but it is wrong a few times a century. And this is one of those times…there’s a need for extraordinary public action at those times.”

Larry Summers is wrong.  The economy is self stabilizing – if only government would get the hell out of the way and let the stabilization happen.

The gist of his program can be expressed in another wistful absurdity: The consumer economy died because of too much spending; now we will revive it by spending more. “Give me your cunning bankers, your hopeless CEOs, your huddled masses of chiselers, spendthrifts and boondogglers,” says the Obama team, “and we’ll give them other peoples’ money!”

This is Keynesian economic theory in action.  It’s just as wrong now as it was in the 1930’s, but the government feels it has to do “something” even it it doesn’t makes sense.

Note – government spending in times of economic slowdown can help alleviate the suffering, but only the government has money to spend.  We’re $11 trillion in debt. Too much debt caused the problem – does anyone really think borrowing more is going to fix it?

“There’s no place that should be reducing its contribution to global demand right now,” explained Summers. “The world needs more demand.” But it was demand that the world recently had too much of. English speakers took on too much debt to create it…and built too many houses and too many shopping malls to satiate it. And despite the ready cash offered by Bush, Bernanke, and Paulson, demand has sunk, because the real problem is not an absence of spending, but a surfeit of debt. In America, for example, total debt went from 150% of GDP in the ’80s to 350% in 2007. The financial markets panicked when it became clear that debtors didn’t have the cash flow to pay off the debt…and that an entire world economy had been fizzed up to supply products to people who couldn’t afford them. Investors have been discounting debt-soaked assets ever since.

The fix is obvious – reduce the level of debt. About $20 trillion worth of debt, in the United States alone, needs to disappear. Then, consumers can go back to doing what they do best – consuming. But how do you reduce the debt level? Former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon had the right idea in 1929: ‘Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate…It will purge the rottenness out of the system…Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people.”

It really is that simple.  That’s capitalism.  People who make bad decisions go broke, and people who make good decisions get wealthy.  Government interference only gums up the process and keeps it from working.  Which is about the only thing governments do well.

What’s the cure for a depression? It’s a depression. Let willing buyers and sellers mark debt down to what it is really worth. Mellon’s plan was not followed by the Hoover or Roosevelt administrations. Instead, they introduced elaborate bailouts, stimulus programs, and boondoggles. That is why the depression is known as the Great Depression, rather than the So-so Depression. By the end of the 30s, the US economy was almost exactly the same size it had been at the beginning. Likewise, in Japan, holding off liquidation brought a “lost decade” in the ’90s. Bush followed in Hoover’s footsteps. And now, the Obama administration follows in Roosevelt’s and Miyazawa’s.

Here’s our advice: forget it. Let the depression do its work. Let the bad times roll!

Great article Mr. Bonner.

gk

Share on Facebook

Capitalism is almost dead in the US.  What follows is a copy and paste of part of yesterday’s Daily Reckoning.  You need to read it – both what follows and the Daily Reckoning site.  Enjoy!

gk

Obama’s new budget is the biggest bag of leeches to come along since the Roosevelt Administration. We have not seen it in detail. But from what we’ve gathered from the press reports, it has something in it for almost every bloodsucker.

The raw numbers are breathtaking. Whereas the feds have taken about 21% of the nation’s income in recent years, now they’re going to take 28%. The deficit alone will equal more than 12% of total GDP.

Put the feds together with state and local hacks, altogether they will consume 40% of the nation’s total output. Whoa…that’s put it close to the levels of such free-market bastions as Zimbabwe and Algeria, both with 43% of spending done by government…and Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela, where the government spends 41% of GDP.

By contrast, in France, that socialistic, bureaucrat-saturated country with the croissants, 53% of GDP is spent by the government. But wait…in France healthcare is a government industry and so is the passenger train system. In America, 17% of GDP is spent on healthcare. As for the passenger trains…forget it…in America, we scarcely have any. So, if you add the 17% spent on private healthcare to the 40% you actually get a total higher than that of France. Ooh la la…the age of big government is back!

Who pays?

Ah…that’s an interesting subject in itself. Obama says he’s going to soak the rich. But the rich are already pretty well marinated. Reagan’s tax cuts freed them to earn more money – and pay more taxes. Now, the top 5% pays 60% of the costs of government. The bottom 40% pay no taxes at all. They get all government ’services’…which is to say their boondoggles…for free.

Share on Facebook

I read this a few minutes ago from yesterday’s DailyReckoning.com.  It’s an excellent article by Doug Casey.

I’m going to quote a few paragraphs from his article (linked above) and highlight a few items which tie into my diatribe about savings yesterday.

“The things they’re doing are not only unproductive, they’re the exact opposite of what should be done. The country got into this mess by living beyond its means for more than a generation. That’s the message from the debt that’s burdening so many individuals; debt is proof that you’re living above your means. The solution is for people to significantly reduce their standard of living for a while and start building capital. That’s what saving is about, producing more than you consume. The government creating funny money – money out of nothing – doesn’t fix anything. All it does is prolong the problem and make it worse by destroying the currency.

Over several generations, huge distortions and misallocations of capital have been cranked into the economy, inviting levels of consumption that are unsustainable. In fact, Americans refer to themselves as consumers. That’s degrading and ridiculous. You should be first and foremost a producer, and a consumer only as a consequence.

In any event, the government is going to destroy the currency, which will be a mega-disaster. And they’re making the depression worse by holding interest rates at artificially low levels, which discourages savings – the exact opposite of what’s needed. They’re trying to prop up a bankrupt system. And, at this point, it’s not just economically bankrupt, but morally and intellectually bankrupt. What they should be doing is recognize that they’re bankrupt and then start rebuilding. But they’re not, so it’s going to be a disaster.

And that’s just a few paragraphs.  Read the rest of it.  If you happen to think that our government is doing the right thing by propping up bad companies, you’ll most likely not agree with Mr. Casey’s article – but hopefully it will open your eyes a bit to the fact that Keynes didn’t get much right after all.  Maybe it will allow you to think about production vs consumption, and enable you to learn something.

gk

Share on Facebook