Showing posts with label Housing Market. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Housing Market. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 9, 2018

Stagflationary Crisis: Understanding The Cause Of America’s Ongoing Collapse

This report was originally published by Brandon Smith at Alt-Market.com



It is at times frustrating, but also interesting, to witness the progression of the mainstream’s awareness of economic crisis within the U.S. over the years. As an alternative economist, I have had the “privilege” of perching outside the financial narrative and observing our economy from a less biased position, and I have discovered a few things.


First, the mainstream economic media is approximately two to three years behind average alternative economists. At least, they don’t seem to acknowledge reality within our time frame. This may be deliberate (my suspicion) because the general public is not meant to know the truth until it is too late for them to react in a practical way to solve the problem. For example, it is a rather strange experience for me to see the term “stagflation” suddenly becoming a major buzzword in the MSM. It is almost everywhere in the past week ever since the last Federal Reserve meeting in which the central bank mentioned higher inflation pressures and removed references in its monthly statement to a “growing economy.”


For those unfamiliar with what stagflation is, it is essentially the loss of economic growth in numerous sectors coupled with a marked spike in consumer and manufacturing costs. In other words, prices keep going up while employment growth, wages, production, etc. decline.


I have been warning about a stagflationary crisis as the ultimate result of central bank bailouts and QE for many years. In 2011, I published an article titled ‘The Debt Deal Con: Is It Fooling Anyone?’ in which I predicted that the Fed would resort to a third round of quantitative easing (they did). This prediction was based on the fact that the previous two QE events had not resulted in the kind of results the central bankers were obviously looking for. At that time, the stock market remained a dubious mess on the verge of a renewed crash, the U.S. debt rating was about to be downgraded by S&P, true employment growth was dismal, etc. The Fed needed something spectacular to keep the system propped up, at least until they were ready to trigger the next stage of the collapse.


In that same article I also discussed the inevitable end result of this stimulus bonanza:  Stagflation.


QE3 was a dramatic con, along with Operation Twist. The Fed got exactly what it wanted — an unprecedented bull market rally in stocks and temporary stability in bond markets. As stocks jumped higher and higher despite all negative fundamental data, the mainstream simply regurgitated the fool’s narrative that a “recovery” was upon us. But now things are changing and no illusion lasts forever.


The second observation I have made is that central banking elites and their cronies tend to give warnings on great economic shifts, but only about a year before they occur. They do this for a few reasons. One, because they are the people that engineer these crisis events in the first place and it’s not very hard to predict a calamity you helped create. Two, because it makes them appear prophetic when they are not, while at the same time giving the public as little time as possible to prepare. And three, because it gives them plausible deniability when the crisis actually happens, because they can claim they “tried to warn us”, though unfortunately it was too late.


The Bank For International Settlements warned of the derivatives and credit crash in 2007, about a year before the disaster struck. In 2017, former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan warned of inevitable “stagflation not seen since the 1970s.” In later comments, he and others attributed this potential crisis to the policies of Donald Trump.


It is important to note that stagflation is entirely the fault of central bankers and not the presidency, though the White House has indeed aided the Fed in its efforts regardless of who sits in the Oval Office.


Years ago there was a rather idiotic battle between financial analysts over what the end result of the Fed’s massive stimulus measures would be. One side argued that deflation would be the outcome and that no amount of Fed printing would overtake the vast black hole of debt conjured by the derivatives implosion. The other side argued that the Fed would continue to print perpetually, resorting to QE4 or possibly “QE infinity” and negative interest rates as a means to stave off a market crash for decades (like Japan) while at the same time initiating a Weimar-style inflationary bonanza.


Both sides were wrong because they refused to acknowledge the third option — stagflation.


The Fed clearly found a way to direct inflationary pressures into certain parts of the economy while allowing deflationary pressures to weigh down other parts of the economy. They also are NOT sticking to their previous strategy of holding interest rates down while pumping up markets with talk of further QE.


Deflationary proponents used to sarcastically argue that if people really believed that inflation would be the consequence of Fed activities then they should jump into the housing market because they would make a mint on price increases. Well, this is exactly what has happened. Home prices have continued to surge despite all fundamentals, including dismal home buyer stats which hit an all time low in 2016 and have barely recovered since.


I use home prices as a prime example of stagflation because the housing market constitutes around 15 percent to 18 percent of total GDP in the U.S. Since items like food and fuel are not counted in the calculation of the CPI index, housing should be the next consideration. Signs of stagflation in housing are a sure indicator of stagflation in the rest of the economy.


The manner in which housing is calculated in the CPI and GDP is a bit odd, of course. Housing is not included in these stats in terms of home purchases annually. In fact, home purchases and improvements are treated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as an “investment” and not as a consumer purchase, which means they are not considered a measure of inflation. However, home values in terms of their “rental cost and change in cost” are counted in CPI.


As we all know, rent prices across the country have been skyrocketing in the past few years along with home prices, while at the same time home buyers have dwindled and the millennial generation is staying at home with mom and dad rather than paying out monthly for homes and apartments. That is to say, in a normal economic environment fewer buyers should result in lower prices, but this is not what has happened. The question is, how has the Federal Reserve and QE contributed to this example of stagflation?


First, the Fed’s artificial support for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after the derivatives debacle allowed for the continued propping up of the housing market when bad debt should have been allowed to cycle out of the system and house prices should have been allowed to fall.


Second, the Fed’s bailout funding of Fannie Mae directly benefited companies like Blackstone, which has become a partner with Fannie Mae and one of the largest buyers of homes in the country. Blackstone has not purchased tens of thousands of homes for resale, but for conversion into rentals. Blackstone’s vast purchases of single family homes has artificially boosted home values across the nation and given the false impression of a housing recovery that does not really exist.


Third, a very interesting discovery; while the central bank under Jerome Powell has become more and more aggressive in its balance sheet reductions, a move which has directly contributed to the recent decline in stock markets, there is one asset class that the Fed has been ADDING to its balance sheet — Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS).  These purchases tend to take place directly after older MBS have been allowed to roll over, meaning, the Fed is maintaining a relatively steady number of MBS while it is dumping other assets.


MBS represent around 40 percent of the Fed’s total balance sheet, and the Fed’s continued fiat support of the MBS market helps explain why home prices refuse to fall despite negative fundamentals. It is also interesting to me that the Fed has chosen to dump certain assets that appear to be causing a downward reaction in stock markets and other sectors while maintaining assets that keep housing prices high. It’s almost as if the Fed wants stagflation…


Finally, while the Fed’s interest rate hikes do not traditionally have a direct correlation to home mortgage rates, there is an indirect correlation. Fears of inflation sometimes ironically create inflation, and as the fed raises interest rates, mortgage rates tend to track. In 2018 mortgage rates have spiked, climbing 48 basis points since the beginning of the year.


This contributes to higher home prices as well a perceived rental values according to the CPI.


The source of almost every instability within our economy can be tracked straight back to the Federal Reserve and the “too-big-to-fail” corporations they bailed out after the credit crash. The current stagflationary development is no different. Stagflation will ultimately result in extreme price increases on necessary goods and services far beyond what we have already seen while the public’s ability to keep up with those prices will falter.


The fact that this issue is FINALLY hitting the mainstream should be concerning to everyone. For when a crisis development is discussed in the mainstream, it means we are on the verge of that crisis reaching its nexus. In June the Fed will raise interest rates yet again despite failing fundamentals. The Fed will continue to cite inflationary pressures, and the Fed will continue to cut its balance sheet. There is no room for delusion on this anymore. The Fed will not stop on its current path. In the meantime, central banks will continue to blame external forces such as trade wars and Trump era policies for stagflation while ignoring the trillions in fiat they have expertly poisoned our financial system with.


All bubbles collapse, but not all bubbles collapse in the exact same way. I believe the Fed has created a perfect storm of combined deflationary and inflationary factors; an economic bomb to surpass all economic bombs.


******


If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.


You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com


After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.

Friday, December 22, 2017

Bitcoin Plummets Below $14,000; Peter Schiff Says "Mark It Zero"

Update: 1005ET: The carnage across cyrptocurrencies has escalated with Bitcoin back to a $13K handle, Ethereum back below $700, and Bitcoin Cash below $2,600...


Bitcoin is now almost $6,000 off its record high...



For those who are keeping track...


  • $0000 - $1000: 1789 days

  • $1000- $2000: 1271 days

  • $2000- $3000: 23 days

  • $3000- $4000: 62 days

  • $4000- $5000: 61 days

  • $5000- $6000: 8 days

  • $6000- $7000: 13 days

  • $7000- $8000: 14 days

  • $8000- $9000: 9 days

  • $9000-$10000: 2 days

  • $10000-$11000: 1 day

  • $11000-$12000: 6 days

  • $12000-$13000: 17 hours

  • $13000-$14000: 4 hours

  • $14000-$15000: 10 hours

  • $15000-$16000: 5 hours

  • $16000-$17000: 2 hours

  • $17000-$18000: 10 minutes

  • $18000-$19000: 3 minutes

  • $19666-$14000: 4 days


ETH and BCH in trouble too...



In fact almost the entire crypto space is collapsing with Ripple the only gainer for now...



There continues to be no obvious catalyst for the run.


Volume is heavy in futures tonight too...



 


The question is - which happens first - Bitcoin $10,000 or Gold $1,300?



*  *  *


After an exuberant few days following Coinbase"s adoption of Bitcoin Cash, the forked currency has collapsed back below $3,000...



For the 4th night in the last 5, someone has started slamming Bitcoin at around 8pmET, pushing the biggest cryptocurrency back below $15,000 for the first time in two weeks...



Catalysts for the drop are unclear other than systematic selling pressure as Asia opens. There was chatter about the lack of security in South Korean local exchanges, but it is unlikely that is the cause for now.



Since CME launched its futures contract, Bitcoin has been under pressure and renowned market watcher Peter Schiff is pretty clear where he thinks this ends up...


As CoinTelegraph reports, speaking to RT this week, renowned analyst Peter Schiff, credited for predicting the 2008 housing market collapse, issued a foreboding warning to investors buying Bitcoin at current prices.


Even with a shaky week, Bitcoin is hovering around the $15,000 mark, after a two-month bull run that saw the price rise by more than 200 percent.


Schiff says those trying to ride the bubble are too late:


“People who got it years ago, even people who got it at the beginning of the year have the opportunity to cash out and make a lot of money. But people who are buying it at these prices or higher prices are going to lose practically everything.”



The old adage, “buy on the rumor and sell on the news,” seems to be the perfect way to sum up Schiff’s sentiments on the current attitude of green investors trying to make a quick buck out of Bitcoin:


“These currencies are going to trade to zero or pretty close to it when the bubble pops. Right now, the only reason why people are buying Bitcoin is because the price is going up. When it turns around, they are not going to sell it for the same reason."



He also voiced by now common criticism of Bitcoin Core’s transaction functionality, noting the low speed and high cost of transactions on the network:


“There is no value in Bitcoin, you can’t use it as money. It’s too slow, too expensive and too vulnerable.”



Still with gold"s recent weakness, we are sure Peter has more than  a small ax to grind on this one.










Proposed Legislation: Fannie And Freddie Are Here To Stay - There Is No Alternative

Since the US government nationalized the two GSEs in 2008 in a $187 billion bailout of the mortgage giants, there have been consistent calls for them to be wound down and for the private sector to fill the void. As we discussed, this view is, or was, shared by new Fed Chairman, Jay Powell.


Mr. Powell has called on Congress to overhaul the housing finance system, saying he’d like to see the country’s two large mortgage-finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, move out from under government conservatorship. More private capital in those firms would reduce the risk of a taxpayer-funded bailout in the event of a downturn, he said in a speech in July.  Although the Fed isn’t responsible for housing finance, it supervises some of the country’s largest lenders who frequently sell their loan to the two agencies. “No single housing finance institution should be too big to fail,” he said.



In August this year, Fannie and Freddie’s regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), published the results of its latest annual stress tests on the two GSE’s. The FHFA outlined a “severely adverse” scenario in which US real GDP decline 6.5%, the unemployment rate rises to 10.0%, equity prices decline almost 50%, home prices decline 25% and commercial real estate prices by 35%. Under these conditions, it estimates Fannie and Freddie would need a bailout of up to $100 billion in the form of a draw on the Treasury (depending on how they treat assets to offset tax).



Mortgages guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie amount to about $4 trillion and account for about 40% of the total US market.



Note: 2017 data through June. Sources: Inside Mortgage Finance, Urban Institute


Sadly, after almost a decade of federal ownership, the hope that Fannie and Freddie could be wound down has evaporated. Senators on both sides of the political divide have concluded that they are too big and too risky to replace. Proposed legislation in 2018 will see them retained at the centre of the US mortgage industry, rather than replacing them as a previous senate proposal tried and failed four years ago. According to the Wall Street Journal.


Lawmakers in both parties and the Trump administration are negotiating overhauls of the two companies—critical to home mortgages but in government conservatorship since the financial crisis—that could keep them at the center of the U.S. mortgage market for years to come, abandoning long-stalled proposals to wind them down, people familiar with the matter said.



Bipartisan Senate legislation set to be introduced in early 2018 marks the clearest sign of this reversal and shows how the companies, entering their 10th year under federal control, have proven too risky to attempt replacing. The housing market has seen strong demand in recent years, driven in part by steady access for many Americans to 4% or lower 30-year fixed-rate mortgages, thanks in part to a government backstop of the companies. Advancing legislation to refashion the nation’s $10 trillion mortgage market is a heavy political lift and may yet sputter during the coming midterm-election year, as a prior Senate effort did four years ago. One big difference this time around: a more incremental approach largely reliant on the existing housing-finance framework.



The new plan, proposed by Senators. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) and Mark Warner (D., Va.) could be introduced as early as next month. Instead of a new mortgage-finance system, Fannie and Freddie will be retained under government control and permitted to issue mortgage securities guaranteed by the Treasury until private sector competitors emerge. The GSE’s investment portfolios, which have fallen to less than $250 billion each from over $900 billion each at their peak, could be liquidated under the Senate plan.


“We’re looking for a more simplified approach that protects the taxpayer, preserves the 30-year fixed mortgage and includes stronger access and affordability provisions,” Mr. Warner said in a statement Friday.



However, Bloomberg’s sources acknowledge that a private sector alternative to Fannie and Freddie will not only take years to emerge, but it’s not clear which companies will enter the market. Besides having the advantage of bi-partisanship, the proposals have the advantage that politicians who wish to reform mortgage finance are reaching retirement age as Bloomberg notes.


Another factor bolstering chances for a deal is the retirement of Washington officials interested in reducing government control of housing, including Mr. Corker. The Tennessee senator has been working with Mr. Warner and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R., Idaho) all year on the issue, according to people familiar with the deliberations, and Mr. Crapo has made the overhaul a top goal for his panel.



Even House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas) signaled this month in a speech to Realtors that he would like to see a Fannie and Freddie deal in what is to be his final year in Congress. Mr. Hensarling said he is still committed to replacing the companies, but has backed off a position that any future setup provide no federal backstop.



Reforming mortgage finance has not been a focus for the Trump administration and nor has it endorsed any proposed legislation thus far. However, Treasury officials are reported to have been in close contact with the Senate officials as the plan has emerged. Furthermore, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who also headed up Goldman’s mortgage securities department in the late 1990s, disagreed with calls for abolishing Fannie and Freddie last month.


“No, I wouldn’t,” he said in an interview at November’s Wall Street Journal CEO Council meeting. “We have got to make sure that the housing system is built to last.”



Bloomberg reports that supporters of Corker and Warner’s proposal see a “narrow window” in early 2018 when the legislation could be added on to another bill to reduce post-crisis regulations in the financial sector.


The question about what to do with Fannie and Freddie has now come full circle since the financial crisis. In its aftermath, the consensus view became so negative that even long-time supporters, like Democrat Barney Frank, capitulated, saying they should be abolished. In 2013, Obama called on Congress to wind them down and “end Fannie and Freddie as we know them”. However, the tide started to turn shortly after due to the lack of confidence in mortgage bonds that didn’t have a government guarantee. The latest Senate proposal is the first having bipartisan backing which keeps Fannie and Freddie instead of replacing them.


So, a bit like the “Too Big To Fail” banks, the encroachment of government into parts of the financial system which it should never have entered, makes winding back that intervention difficult, if not impossible. We could have seen it coming as Bloomberg laments.


Washington’s about-face will come as little surprise to market participants who for years predicted that efforts to replace Fannie and Freddie, which together back around half of all outstanding mortgages, would prove too difficult. But the shift on Capitol Hill nevertheless illustrates one way in which policy ideologues appear to have lost ground to market realities.



 









Saturday, December 16, 2017

This Map Shows Where Millennials Are Buying Houses (And For How Much)

Millennial homeownership rates are essential to understanding the housing market because they facilitate additional home sales for other people.


How does this work? As HowMuch.net explains, suppose you make an offer on a house. The current owner is also probably on the market, and he or she likely has a contingent offer on another house. This sets off a chain reaction throughout the economy. Millennial homeownership rates are therefore an easy way to judge the economic vitality of any given area.


That’s why HowMuch.net created this new map...



Source: HowMuch.net


Our viz takes millennial homeownership data from Abodo and maps it by metro area across the country. Abodo adopted the data from the U.S. Census Bureau, which regularly collects a variety of information about the population, including the age of homeowners, the estimated value of their homes, and how long it would take to accumulate a 20% down payment. Our numbers are from 2015. We then overlaid this information across metro areas with bubbles representing the portion of millennial homeowners in each market: the bigger the bubble, the more millennial homeowners there are. We also color-coded each bubble to represent the median value of their homes—dark red circles mean the homes are worth over $500k, and dark blue means under $200k. This gives you a quick snapshot of the overall economy and the housing market.


The first trend you can see on the map is a clustering of red circles on both the West Coast and along the Northeast.


The most expensive city in the country for millennials is San Jose, CA, where the average millennial buys a home worth $737,077. Seattle, WA in the Northwest is also relatively expensive at $342,769. These are population-dense areas with booming tech sectors. At the other end of the spectrum, you can see clusters of blue bubbles across the Midwest in old manufacturing cities like Detroit, MI ($148,404) and Cleveland, OH ($160,251). Memphis, TN is the cheapest place for millennials at $142,795. Southern states like Texas and Florida are also relatively affordable thanks in large part to their suburban sprawl, which Zillow predicts will expand next year.


It’s no surprise that homes are more expensive in California (think Silicon Valley) than the industrial heartland, but consider how homeownership rates change based on affordability. The red bubbles all tend to be smaller than the blue bubbles. This means that as homes get more expensive, millennials become increasingly unable to afford them. It’s not like there’s a surplus of ultra-rich millennials buying up all the houses in California and New York. Millennials are just as sensitive to high prices as everyone else.


Let’s break the map down into a top ten list of the urban areas with the highest rates of millennial homeownership, combined with the average price of their home. A full 42% of the millennials living in Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN own their own home, the highest rate in the country.


1. Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI: 42.4% and $222,528


2. St. Louis, MO-IL: 40.2% and $167,791


3. Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI: 40.2% and $148,404


4. Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN: 38.5% and $158,974


5. Pittsburgh, PA: 37.5% and $152,731


6. Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson, IN: 37.4% and $161,856


7. Kansas City, MO-KS: 37.1% and $170,254


8. Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN: 37.0% and $213,090


9. Oklahoma City, OK: 36.7% and $172,485


10. Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD: 36.3% and $272,805



Buying a home is often the biggest financial decision anybody makes, and that’s especially true for young people. And there’s a lot to consider when buying your first home, but one thing other than affordability to keep in mind is how many other millennials are in the same situation. If you’re a millennial looking to buy a home, and you want to live next to other young people, you just might have to move to the Midwest.









Friday, December 15, 2017

Swedish Housing Bubble Pops As Stockholm Apartment Prices Crash Most Since June 2009

Even though Sweden’s property bubble is not the longest running (that accolade goes to Australia at 55 years), it is probably the world’s biggest with prices up roughly 6-fold since starting its meteoric rise in 1995.



Of course, as we noted last month when the SEB"s housing price indicator, which measures the difference between those who believe prices will rise and those who expect them to drop, took its first substantial tumble, the era of the steadily inflating housing bubble in Stockholm may finally have come to an end.


Sweden


Now, it seems that the "hard data" is aligning with the "soft data" as Swedish home prices across the Nordic country posted their first decline since the spring of 2012, down 0.2% year-over-year and 2.9% sequentially.  Per Bloomberg:








The property market in the largest Nordic economy is rapidly cooling after years of price increases that were driven largely by housing shortages and ultra-low interest rates. Supply is now outstripping demand and stricter mortgage rules, as well as growing apprehension among households, are driving prices lower. The drop is being led by high-end apartments in Stockholm.


 


According to Maklarstatistik’s number, nationwide apartment prices fell a monthly 3 percent in November, adding to October’s 1 percent drop. House prices fell 1 percent in the month, after being unchanged in October. Apartment prices in greater Stockholm fell 3 percent in the month and were down 4 percent from a year earlier, the first such decline in almost six years.




Worse yet, the slump in Stockholm specifically is even more dramatic with apartment prices down 4.2% sequentially, the steepest since October 2008, and 6.0% year-over-year, the biggest June 2009.



Not surprisingly, the sudden pricing collapse has sparked a bit of a panic supply boost as sellers attempt to beat the bursting of the bubble.  Of course, we"re sure this strategy will work out perfectly, as it always does, because nothing helps correct an over-supplied market like a massive flood of even more supply. 








Greater supply “has resulted in buyers having more to choose from and taking longer before buying,” Hans Flink, head of sales and business development at Maklarstatistik, said in a statement. “The sellers are therefore starting to adjust their prices to the tougher competition, which is pushing prices down somewhat.”




Luckily, Bloomberg was able to find at least one economist who dug up some "rather encouraging" signs amongst the wreckage...








But there may be glimmers of hope. Andreas Wallstrom, an economist at Nordea Bank AB in Stockholm, said data for the last few weeks from property-listings website Booli “are rather encouraging,” as they indicate that prices have leveled out since mid-November and up until the first week of December. Average prices per square meter have even increased somewhat in both Stockholm and in the country as a whole in that period, he said.


 


“Our tentative call for December is that home prices will stay unchanged compared to November,” Wallstrom said. “In all, we forecast relatively stable home prices from here. To see a sustained downturn in prices, it will likely require a change in households’ housing costs. As long as mortgage rates remain low, which we expect, it is difficult to see a marked decline.”



Of course, we remember some Bear Stearns analysts who saw similarly "rather encouraging" signs in the U.S. housing market back in 2008...









Thursday, December 14, 2017

Asset Prices Are "Prices" Too...

Authored by Thorstein Polleit via The Mises Institute,



We live in inflationary times.


Some people might consider this statement controversial. This is because these days inflation is widely understood as a rise in the consumer price index (CPI) of more than 2 percent per year. However, there are convincing reasons to question this viewpoint. On the one hand, the CPI does not include “assets” such as, for instance, stocks, housing, real estate, etc. As a result, the price developments of these goods are not accounted for by the changes in the CPI.


On the other hand, and even more essential, price changes of goods and services are associated with changes in the quantity of money. This is why economists used to understand a rise in the quantity of money as inflationary (and a decline in the quantity of money as deflationary): Without money sloshing around, there could not be a phenomenon like inflation — that is an ongoing upward trend in all prices of goods and services over time. The truth is that rising prices across the board is inextricably linked to money.


Asset Prices Are Prices


One indicator of an inflationary monetary development is the link between the US money stock M2 and nominal GDP. This ratio can be referred to as a measure of "excess liquidity." Since the outbreak of the crisis 2008/2009, excess liquidity has been growing strongly — as GDP growth lagged behind the increase in the quantity of money. Why? Well, a great deal of the monetary expansion has been driving asset prices upwards — most notably in the stock and housing market.



poll1_0.png


The Federal Reserve (Fed) has created yet another “inflationary boom." The US economy is fueled by extremely low interest rates, accompanied by additional credit and money growth created out of thin air. The monetary expansion leads to an artificial rise in consumption and investment spending, resulting in production and employment gains. Furthermore, the newly created liquidity finds its way into financial (asset) markets, driving up asset prices and even valuation levels.


How To Keep the Boom Going: More Inflation


To keep the inflationary boom going - and prevent the “bust,” - the Fed has to make sure that credit and money supply keep increasing and that, by no means less important, borrowing and capital costs remain at fairly low levels. That said, the ongoing inflationary policy must - and for political reasons most likely will - go on. Higher interest rates and a slowdown of credit and money creation would take away the punch bowl - and the party would come to a shrieking halt. The economic boom would turn into bust.


Inflation only works if it comes unnoticed, if there is “surprise inflation.” However, as soon as people find out that the purchasing power of money goes down more than they had expected, the chickens come home to roost: People factor in higher inflation into their contracts for wages, leases and credit. If this happens, there is no longer surprise inflation, and inflation loses its power to stimulate the economy (through misleading price signals, that is).


A central bank that wants to keep the boom going and prevent the bust is left with just one option: it has to create a higher dose of surprise inflation. The reader may already know what such an “inflation game” is leading to. It puts the economy on a high-inflation road or, in the extreme case, a super-inflation road or even a hyper-inflation road that will ultimately destroy the purchasing power of the currency.


Why There Is No Perceived Crisis


So far, financial markets have remained fairly relaxed. Inflation is not seen as a major problem as proven by, for instance, inflation expectations. How come? There might be two reasons for this. First, the majority of people derive their inflation expectations from experienced CPI inflation (we can speak of “adaptive inflation expectations”). As the latter has been relatively low for many years, people do not expect inflation to edge up in the years to come.



poll2_0.png


Second, many people still do not seem to realize that “asset price inflation” ruins the purchasing power of money in the same way as CPI inflation does: If you want to buy stocks, houses or land with your money, you will get less for your money if prices for these goods go up. However, as long as asset price inflation is not understood as a form of "true inflation," inflation expectations are tamed, and central banks can continue their inflationary scheme. 


Against this backdrop we can draw two conclusions. First, inflation is alive and kicking, it is currently raging in asset price increases. Second, an inflationary boom runs the risk of turning into a bust at some point — a scenario which would hit the economy, the financial system, and asset prices hard. Unfortunately, one cannot forecast (with any scientific precision) when the boom will turn into bust; it really depends on certain conditions.


That said, the current boom may go on for quite a while — with the economies keeping expanding and asset prices rushing from one record level to the next. However, we do know from sound economics that the current inflationary boom — which is presumably welcomed by many as it provides more jobs and additional incomes — is actually sowing the seeds of a bust.


The investor should keep in mind that central banks do not only set into motion an inflationary boom in the first place (which will end in tears), but that they will fight an approaching bust with even more inflation (by increasing the quantity of money even further). That said, investors are well-advised to live up to a rather uncomfortable truth: We"ve had inflation, and there will be more of it. Money will continue to lose its purchasing power.










Tuesday, December 12, 2017

Sweden: More Signs The World"s Biggest Housing Bubble Is Cracking

We like to highlight that although Sweden’s property bubble is not the longest running (that accolade goes to Australia at 55 years), it is probably the world’s biggest, even though it gets relatively little coverage in the mainstream financial media.



A month ago, we noted that SEB’s housing price indicator suffered its second biggest ever drop, falling by 39 points, only lagging a steeper fall from ten years earlier. This month the indicator, which shows the balance between households forecasting rising or falling prices, fell into negative territory, dropping to -5 from +11 in November. Households expecting prices to rise has almost halved from 66% In October, to 43% in November and 36% this month. The percentage of households expecting prices to fall has risen from 16% in October, to 32% in November and 41% this month.


After the housing price indicator was published, the Swedish krona fell as much as 0.7% versus the Euro to 10.0118, its lowest level since 5 December 2017.


Not surprisingly, the focal point of Sweden’s property boom has been Stockholm, where the decline in the housing price indicator in December 2017 was precipitous. According to Bloomberg.


SEB says sharp drop in home-price expectations in Stockholm was main culprit behind the decline in its Swedish home-price indicator, with the indicator falling to -42 in the Swedish capital in Dec. from -6 in Nov. That means the Stockholm indicator is now close to the record low of -47 that was reached in Dec. 2008, at the height of the global financial crisis.



(SEB) says 63% of households in Stockholm now expect prices to decline in the coming year while only 21% expect an increase; that’s “a dramatic shift compared with only two months’ ago,”



Given the disproportionate rate of decline in December in Stockholm, SEB was minded to ask whether special factors are at work “rather than general drivers such as fears over rising interest rates or a weak business cycle”. Indeed, aside from south-eastern Sweden, the outlook in all other regions remains positive. With regard to Stockholm, the bank notes that a large increase in new supply of expensive residential property and what it terms “very negative media reporting” have had an impact. Whether that’s a fair assessment, or whether it’s realist reporting of a monumental asset bubble is a moot point. What is indisputable is that the number of Swedish homes for sale has surged in November 2017 compared with the same month last year.



SEB is still undecided on whether Stockholm is a leading indicator for Sweden in general, as Bloomberg notes.


Differences between regions are “unusually high and some of the factors that currently weigh on Stockholm could turn out to be of a more temporary nature, especially given a continued lack of housing, low rates and the strong labor market”



The official HOX/Valueguard house price data for November 2017 will be published on 14 December. Last month, the weakness in SEB’s housing price indicator preceded clear evidence of a decline in Swedish house prices and the likely end to the housing bubble. Average house prices for Sweden fell 3.0% in October versus the previous month, with Stockholm prices down 3.7%. SEB expects “continued small sequential declines and as regards Stockholm also year-on-year” when the data is published on Thursday.




Ahead of the data, some analysts are expecting a “November Noir” with the month-on-month decline comparable with or even worse than what was seen in October 2017. Previewing the announcement, Bloomberg explains.


Anyone with a stake in Sweden’s property market should make space for Thursday in their calendar. That’s when they’ll get fresh clues as to whether they are facing a temporary blip or the start of a full-blown crash…There are indications that the monthly drop will be as big - if not bigger - than October’s, when prices fell 3 percent, the steepest decline since the global financial crisis of 2008.



Nordea Bank AB expects a “November Noir,” with home prices declining 3 percent on a monthly basis and 1 percent on an annual basis. Property-listings website Booli, which is owned by mortgage lender SBAB, said on December 7 that the average selling price for Swedish apartments last month fell 3 percent from the same period a year earlier, led by a 7 percent drop in Stockholm.



While we wouldn’t like to second guess the outcome of Thursday’s data, we would strongly disagree that the fall in prices is already “close to the bottom”. Bloomberg found an analyst with an upbeat view.


All told, there may still be a glimmer of hope. “Looking only at developments over the past two weeks, prices have remained largely stable, both in the country as a whole and in Stockholm,” Nordea’s Andreas Wallstrom said on December 5. “This could be a tentative signal that we are close to the bottom and that our forecast of largely stable prices ahead is on track.”




What we are finding harder to fathom are the schizophrenic views of the normally glum looking Riksbank Governor, Stefan Ingves, who has presided over Sweden’s property boom for more than a decade. Bloomberg reports him arguing that a slowdown is “not a big concern”, which contrasts sharply the grave warning he gave to the Financial Times in October 2016.


But despite a lack of drama so far, Mr Ingves remains worried about a bad ending due to risks over financial stability.



He said: “It remains an issue because we are mismanaging our housing market. Our housing market isn’t under control, in my view.” The ratio of household debt to disposable income in Sweden is one of the highest in the world at more than 180 per cent and the Riksbank estimates it will continue to rise in the coming years.



We have more sympathy with the latter.
 









Saturday, December 9, 2017

THE DISINFORMATION WAR: The Attempt To Disregard Silver Investor Demand In The Market

SRSrocco


By the SRSrocco Report,


There is a Disinformation War taking place in the silver market as certain industry analysis is confusing individuals by purposely disregarding the tremendous impact of rising investment demand.  Not only do I find this troubling, but I am also quite surprised how much the silver industry pays attention to this faulty analysis.  So, it"s time once again to set the record straight.



Setting the record straight has now become a new mission for me at the SRSrocco Report because the amount of disinformation and faulty analysis being published in the mainstream and alternative media is quite disturbing.  I decided it was time to say enough was enough, so I started by destroying the myth about the 1 million tons of gold hidden in the Grand Canyon in my recent article, THE BLIND CONSPIRACY: The Gold Market Is Heading Towards A Big Fundamental Change.


If you haven"t read that article and are still confused on whether or not there are billions of ounces of gold hidden in the Grand Canyon, I highly recommend that you do.  Now, if you read the article and still believe the U.S. Government decided to make the Grand Canyon a national park to protect all that gold, then you have my sympathies.  However, the reason certain individuals in the U.S. Government decided to make the Grand Canyon a national park because it was probably a GOOD IDEA to keep a beautiful part of the country off-limits from those who had no problem with destroying the banks of the Colorado by trying to extract gold at a pathetically low uneconomical yield.


If you have seen some of the episodes of the Discovery Channel"s Gold Rush show, the result of gold dredging operations isn"t pretty.  Here is a picture of the beautiful landscape outside of Dawson City in the Yukon that shows the effects of placer mining and gold dredging.  Now, how many families in the U.S. and abroad would have taken their kids on vacation to the Grand Canyon if it looked like this?  I am quite amazed at the lack of dignity and respect by individuals who only seek at the almighty Dollar.



(aerial photo of Dawson City, Yukon - picture courtesy of Peter Mather)


To tell you the truth, I am glad that Teddy Roosevelt had the foresight to dedicate the Grand Canyon as a national monument back in 1908.  At least some politicians had the wisdom to keep OFF LIMITS parts of the country, so we weren"t able to destroy it by mining it for ultra low-grade gold or bulldoze it, pour concrete and build another million suburban homes.


Okay, let"s get back to subject at hand... Silver Market Disinformation.


Precious Metals Analyst Totally Omits Silver Investment Demand From Market Fundamentals


The motivation to write this article came from several of my readers who sent me an interview by CPM Group"s Jeff Christian, at the San Franciso Gold and Silver Summit.  In the video, Jeff claims that there has been a silver market surplus for ten years and those industry analysts, who have reported deficits, "Are simply wrong."  Jeff goes onto to say, "they have been wrong the entire time they have been on the silver market."



Jeff continues by explaining that to analyze the silver market correctly, you must look at surplus and deficits based on total supply versus total fabrication demand.   Furthermore, he criticizes industry analysts who may be promoting metal by throwing in investment demand to arrive at a deficit.  He says this is not the proper way to do "commodities research analysis."


Jeff concludes by making the point, "that if you keep silver investment demand as an "off-budget item," then the price matches your supply-demand analysis almost perfectly."  Does it?  Oh... really?


If we look at the CPM Group"s Supply & Demand Balance chart, I wonder how Jeff is calculating his silver price analysis:



This graph is a few years old, but it still provides us with enough information to show that the silver price has nearly quadrupled during the period it experienced supposed surpluses.  According to the CPM Group"s methodology of analyzing total fabrication demand versus supply, how on earth did the silver price rise from an average of $5.05 during the deficit period to an average of $19.52 during the surplus period?  I arrived at the silver prices by averaging the total for each time-period.


Again, Jeff states during the interview that their supply-demand analysis, minus investment demand, provides an almost perfect price analysis.  According to the CPM Group"s 2016 Silver Yearbook, the total surplus for the period 2008-2016 was approximately 900 million oz.  With the market enjoying a near one billion oz surplus, why would that be bullish for a $20 silver price??  It isn"t... and I will explain why.


As I have mentioned in many articles and interviews, the price of silver has been based upon the price of oil which impacts its cost of production.  If we look at the following chart, we can plainly see how the price of silver has corresponded with the oil price going back until 1900:



You will notice the huge price spike in the 1970"s after Nixon dropped the Gold-Dollar peg causing inflation to run amuck in the United States.  Now, the oil price didn"t impact just silver; it also influenced the value of gold:



As with the oil-silver trend lines, the gold and oil price lines remained flat until the U.S. went to a 100% Fiat Currency system in 1971.  So, if we decided to throw out all gold and silver supply-demand forces, we can see that these precious metals prices paralleled the oil price.  Now, the reason the price of silver shut up to an average of $19.52 from 2006-2017 was due to its average cost of production.  Today, the market price of silver is $16.42, and the average cost of primary silver production is between $15-$17 an ounce.  According to my analysis of the top two gold mining companies, their cost of production is about $1,150.  Hence, the 71-1 Gold-Silver price ratio.


Did Jeff Christian include the cost of production in his analysis of the silver price?  How many silver mining companies are producing silver for $5 an ounce and making an $11 profit?  Or how many silver mining companies are producing silver at $35 and losing nearly $20 an ounce?  I will tell you... ZERO.


The only way an individual would believe that the primary silver mining companies are producing silver at $5 an ounce is if they believe in the investor presentations that report CASH COSTS.  Anyone who continues to use CASH COST accounting needs to get their head examined.  It is by far the most bogus metric in the industry that has caused more confusion for investors than anything else... well, if we don"t include faulty analysis by certain individuals.


I find it utterly amazing that the CPM Group entirely omits silver investment from their fundamental analysis.  Here is a chart of their total world silver fabrication demand from their 2016 Silver Outlook Report:



If you are a silver investor, your demand doesn"t count.  It doesn"t matter if you purchased 100 of the half a billion oz of Silver Eagles sold by the U.S. Mint since 1986.  How many Silver Eagles have been sold back, melted down and returned to the market to be used for industrial applications??  According to the 2017 World Silver Survey (GMFS), total Official Silver Coin sales were 965 million oz (Moz) since 2007.  If we add Official Silver Coin sales for 2017, it will be well over one billion.  I highly doubt any more than a fraction of that one billion oz of Offical Silver Coins were remelted and sold back into the market.


Moreover, what term do we give to companies who produce Silver Eagles or private silver rounds??  Aren"t companies fabricating silver bars and coins?  While it is true that physical silver bar and coins can be sold back into the market, a lot of new demand is coming from fabricating new silver bullion products.


CPM Group only values silver as a mere commodity for the sole purpose of supplying the market for industrial, jewelry, silverware, photography and photovoltaic uses.  I gather 2,000+ years of silver as money no longer matters.  Yes, I would imagine some precious metals investors are feeling a bit frustrated as they watch Bitcoin go vertical towards $12,000.  But a word of caution to Bitcoin investors who are dreaming about sugar plums dancing in their heads and dollar signs in the eyes.


Now, when you see an article titled, Signs Of A Market Top? This Pole Dancing Instructor Is Now A Bitcoin Guru; it might be prudent for you to recall a memorable part of the move in The Big Short:


There is a wonderful scene where a pole dancer is explaining to a fund manager how she"s buying five houses.


A lowly paid pole dancer who survives on unpredictable tips should not be able to afford multiple houses, but this was the sub-prime USA where the ability to repay a loan was apparently not a prerequisite.


What a coincidence... ah??  Pole dancers buying five homes and becoming a Bitcoin Guru.  What"s next?  LOL.


Regardless, the notion by CPM Group that investment demand shouldn"t be included in supply and demand forecasts suggests that the gold market has experienced a total 418 million oz (Moz) surplus since 2006.  Yes, that"s correct.  I calculated total global gold physical and ETF investment demand by using the World Gold Council figures:



The reason for the drop-off in net gold investment in 2013-2015 was due to Gold ETF liquidations.  For example, 915 metric tons (29 Moz) of Gold ETF inventories were supposedly liquidated into the market.  Even though the gold market experienced a record 1,707 metric tons of physical bar and coin demand in 2013, the liquidation of 915 metric tons of Gold ETF"s provided a net 792 metric tons of total gold investment.  Please understand, I am just using these figures to prove a point.  I really don"t care if the Gold ETFs have all their gold.  I look at Global Gold ETF demand (spikes) as an indicator for gauging the amount of fear in the market.


The CPM Group does the same sort of supply and demand analysis for gold.  They omit investment demand from the equation:



(CPM Group Chart Courtesy of Kitco.com)


Again, according to the CPM Group, gold bar and coins aren"t fabricated.  They must be produced by Gold Elves in some hidden valley in the Grand Canyon.  No doubt, under the strict control by the NSA department of the U.S. Government.


For anyone new to reading my work... I am being sarcastic.


Moreover, the significant change in gold investment demand is a clear sign that investors are still quite concerned about the highly inflated bubble markets.  If we go back to 2002, total gold investment was a paltry 352 metric tons compared to 358 metric tons of technology consumption and 2,662 metric tons of gold jewelry demand.  However, in 2011, the gold market experienced a massive 1,734 metric tons of total gold investment versus 2,513 metric tons of jewelry and technology fabrication.


What is significant about this trend change?  In 2002, global gold investment was a mere 10% of total gold demand.  However, by 2011, gold investment demand surged to 41% of the total, not including Central Bank demand.  Even in 2016, global gold investment demand was still 40% of the total.  As we can see, investors still represent 40% of the market, whereas they were only 10% in 2002.


Precious metals investors need to understand there is a huge difference between Gold and Silver versus all other metals and commodities.  The overwhelming majority of commodities are consumed while gold and to a lesser extent, silver, are saved.  And, they are being purchased as investments and saved for an excellent reason.


The world continues to add debt at unprecedented levels.  In just the month of November, the U.S. Government added another $137 billion to its total debt.  This doesn"t include the $610 billion of additional debt added since the debt ceiling was lifted on September 8th.  So, the American public is indebted by another $747 billion in less than three months.


Getting back to silver, according to the GFMS team at Thomson Reuters, who provide the World Silver Survey for the Silver Institute, the market will experience a small annual silver surplus this year for the first time in several decades:



The reason for the surplus has to do with a marketed decline of silver investment demand this year.  With the election of President Trump to the Whitehouse and the "Pole Dancing Guru" Bitcoin market moving up towards $12,000, demand for the silver investment fell by 50% this year.  However, I don"t look at it as a negative.  Oh no... it"s an indicator that the market has gone completely insane.


This reminds me once again of the movie, The Big Short.  In the movie, the main actor bets big against the Mortgaged-Backed Securities.  Unfortunately, just as the housing markets start to crash and the mortgage-back security market begins to get in trouble, the bets that the main actor in the movie made, began to go against him.  That"s correct.  His short bets against the market should have started to gain in value, but the banks wanted to dump as much of that crap on other POOR UNWORTHY SLOB INVESTORS before they would let it rise.


We are in the very same situation today.  However, the entire market is being propped up, not just the housing market.


It is impossible to forecast a more realistic gold and silver price when 99% of the market is invested in the wrong assets.  So, for the CPM Group to value gold and silver based on their fabrication demand totally disregards 2,000+ years of their use as monetary metals.


Thus, it comes down to an IDEOLOGY on why Gold and Silver should be valued differently than mere commodities, or even most STOCKS, BONDS, and REAL ESTATE.  Valuing gold and silver can"t be done with typical supply and demand fundaments.  The only reason I analyze supply and demand fundamentals is to understand what is happening to the market over a period of time.


For example, if we look at total global silver investment demand and price, there isn"t a correlation:



But, if we look at what happened to silver investment demand since the 2008 Housing and Banking collapse, we can spot a significant trend change:



As we can see, world physical silver bar and coin demand nearly quadrupled after the 2008 Housing and Banking collapse.  This is the indicator that is important to understand.  While silver investment demand after 2008 has increased partly due to the higher price, the more important motivation by investors is likely a strategic hedge against the highly-leveraged fiat monetary system and stock market.


Investors who follow the CPM Group"s analysis on gold and silver based upon fabrication demand only, are being misinformed.  Jeff Christian who runs the CPM Group has no idea about the Falling EROI - Energy Returned On Investment or does he understand the dire energy predicament we are facing.  Thus, Mr. Christian and the CPM Group still look at the markets as if they will continue business as usual for the next 50 years.


We are heading into a future that we are not prepared.  The economy and markets will likely disintegrate much quicker than anything we have experienced before.  I believe the Bitcoin-Cryptocurrency market is going to collapse shortly due to what I see as extreme leverage in the system with very little in the way of cash reserves.  I hear stories that trading in and out of cryptos isn"t a problem until you want to receive a substantial amount of funds in your bank.  That is a huge RED FLAG.


So, take this warning... as well as the knowledge that pole dancers are becoming Bitcoin gurus.  If it"s too good to be true, it"s likely too good to be true.


Lastly, I want to thank everyone who continues to support the SRSrocco Report site.  Those who have become members of my site or Patreon might wonder why the membership count does not rise that much.  This is because while I receive new members, some fall off each month for various reasons.  However, I sincerely appreciate the support and believe the SRSrocco Report site is providing analysis, information, and data not found anywhere else on the internet.


Lastly, if you want to pay more for precious metals, than I suggest you don"t check out our PRECIOUS METALS INVESTING section or our new LOWEST COST PRECIOUS METALS STORAGE page.


Check back for new articles and updates at the SRSrocco Report.