The Room : Automotive Industry

The Room – 06/12/2009

David Galland — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:08:00 GMT

The Room Special Alert:

Casey Research Summit, this one dedicated to Energy and Special Situations

September 18 – 20 at the Westin Tabor Center in Denver

David

Dear Readers,

Again this week, I was admonished by one of your fellow dear readers, who recommended that I keep my political comments to myself. And furthermore that I, and the entire Casey team, should focus solely on finding the next great investment.

While I can’t and won’t argue with the latter part of his advice -- that is, after all, our overarching mandate, and a mandate we take seriously – I suspect the real issue is that the political views we occasionally express run contrary to those of the author of this rebuke.

Even so, if you give the matter any thought at all, you will almost have to conclude that the business of America is now hugely dependent on the business of government.

As a refresher, the following – compliments of the Encyclopedia of Business – describes the two major foundations economies have typically been built on in modern times: central planning and capitalism.

centrally planned economy

capitalism,

Now, I may be naïve about certain things, for example the autoeroticism of the sort apparently favored by the late David Carradine, but I’m not naïve enough to think that there is such a thing as a "pure" economy that fits either of those two descriptions to a T.

Therefore, the important thing is to understand where your particular economy – in my case, that of the United States – falls on the scale between the two systems.

I usually refuse to jump into the same rumpled bed as the hard right wing of the U.S. political spectrum, but they are probably waving their arms about the same economic concerns we comment on here and in our other publications from time to time.

What makes me different from the Limbaughs et al., and maybe it is a fading difference, is that I really would like the current administration to succeed. As I don't really like either party, either party will do – as long as that party makes intelligent choices about the role government should play in our daily lives.

President Obama appears to be a reasonable, intelligent, and certainly articulate human being. Therefore, I hold out hope that he will eventually come around to making the only logical decision that can be made about the path forward. If for no other reason than that choosing the wrong path will inevitably lead to election defeat.

To prove that simple point, it is hard to miss the rising tide of fiscally conservative attitudes evidenced in the polling booths during the recent European elections. Europe, which is not exactly known for its free-market policies, rose up as one and soundly defeated the hard left socialist candidates on the ballot.

Unfortunately, at this point, Obama and his many government operatives and sycophants appear to be speeding down the wrong road – the road that leads to a continued shift in the direction of a centrally planned economy.

For example, this week the House of Representatives passed a bill that meddles with the choices that Americans make regarding the cars they drive. The idea is to give a marketing boost to the new U.S.-owned auto companies. enticing consumers to buy new cars by taking up to $4,500 out of taxpayers’ pockets and giving the money to others. Those, in turn, give it to automakers that provide cars that drive at least two miles further per gallon in the tank.

Here’s a quick take on the bill from politico.com…

There has always been a problem with a centrally planned economy. When you remove the free market from the supply and demand equation or tamper with the free market, you cause unnatural dislocations and all manner of unintended consequences.

Of course, Mr. Obama enjoys strong union support, and we as taxpayers now own large shares in the American auto manufacturers. Therefore, the good intention of the central planners in Congress is that this "cash for clunkers" law will unleash a new wave of naked consumerism, returning the economy to the happy days we all wish for.

There are, however, more than a few flies in the ointment. Starting with the fact that for the last six years, the top-selling cars in these United States have all been produced by Japanese companies. While many of those cars are now built in the United States, they are not built in Detroit, and they are not built by GM or Chrysler.

It is also worth pointing out that all of the top sellers will easily qualify for the largess being offered by we the U.S. taxpayer. Perhaps the legislators hope that GM's new hybrid, the "Volt,” will ride to the rescue. But Toyota’s well-selling Prius hybrid – which has recently been redesigned, is a huge hit in Japan, and is expected to fare equally well in the U.S. – could throw a wrench in GM’s poorly laid-out plan. Especially because the Prius sells for about half of what the Volt is expected to debut at. With either car, you get the $4,500 rebate, so the choice comes down to this: do you want to pony up an extra $20,000 for a GM-made experiment or get a proven high-quality winner from Toyota for a lot less?

According to a study by researchers at Carnegie Mellon, the premium sought by GM can’t be rationalized:

plug-in hybrids

The problem is the added weight – and the cost of the batteries. The lifespan of the batteries is also a big question mark. According to an article on Mixed Power…

K.G. Duleep, managing director of consulting firm Energy & Environmental Analysis Inc. in Arlington, Virginia, and a researcher on a U.S. study on plug-ins and other advanced autos, said he is very skeptical about the lifespan of the batteries. “I’m very skeptical about the prospects for near-term durability of the batteries. Even in the lab, they aren’t lasting more than seven years,” said Duleep.
So, into the dogfight for what few automobiles will be sold in the crunch years ahead, the new and supposedly improved Government Motors (GM) will send an expensive, so far unproven entrant... which, according to the central planners, will be snapped up in such quantities as to knock off the reigning champs, all Japanese. My take: GM is a dead duck, and the Japanese will be the primary beneficiaries of this latest bit of central planning.

GM was delisted from the NASDAQ this week, and investors looking to buy it must turn to the disgraceful OTC Pink Sheets for their shares.

And this is what the central planners have deemed worthy of dropping $25 billion in taxpayer funds on.

Health Care, Everyone?

The central planners are also hard at work on putting the final bullet into the head of American healthcare. The first shot, Medicare, only severely wounded it.

Speaking of Medicare, the following data points may prove useful as you hear more and more about the greater efficiency supposedly gained by having the government expand its health options to cover everyone.

(FYI: Medicare Part A, passed into law in 1965, covers hospital visits for those over the age of 65 or with certain types of medical conditions; Part B, passed later, covers doctor’s visits and certain outpatient services; Part C allowed private insurers to provide the Medicare benefits; and Part D, passed in 2003, provided prescription drug benefits.)

So, how has that whole Medicare efficiency thing been working out?

The following is from "Medicare for All" Universal Health Care Would Not Solve the Problem of Rising Health Care Costs by David Hogberg, Ph.D.

The fiscal future of Medicare itself is bleak. The Medicare Trustees report notes that, by 2018, revenues for Part A will only be sufficient to cover 80 percent of its costs. By 2080, revenues will only cover 29 percent of costs. “Closing deficits of this magnitude,” the report warns, “will require very substantial increases in tax revenues and/or reductions in expenditures.” The prospects for Part B and Part D are not much better, with the report stating that revenues for those parts will “have to increase rapidly to match expected expenditure growth under current law.” From 2005-2080, the report predicts, Medicare’s share of GDP will rise from 2.7 percent to 11 percent.
There are numerous fiscal problems associated with any government-provided program, especially one that ignores pre-existing conditions, as is the case with the current legislation now being proposed. One is that greater accessibility at a lower cost – or for many, at no cost at all – and providing credits toward government payments to households with revenues of up to $110,000 will make people flock to the docs in large and steady numbers. And that, of course, will drive the cost of healthcare even higher. Call it an unintended consequence if you will, but I will call it a completely natural and to-be-expected consequence.

Thus, though the Obama administration projects that the nation will have to spend another trillion dollars it doesn't have providing medical care for all -- that number is certainly far off the actual tally required.

Again, according to Dr. Hogberg…

Why anyone would want to put every American in a program that is already nearing fiscal collapse is perplexing, to say the least.
As for dislocations, in the current legislation, private insurers will not be able to deny a person coverage for pre-existing conditions or charge them a higher premium. This bit of central planning means simply that everyone will have to pay a higher premium. Furthermore, companies in the healthcare industry will almost certainly have to compete with a government-run insurance program whose mandate will be to ensure that everyone can afford insurance.

Shareholders in private U.S. health insurance companies are already burdened by their share of the costs that those companies have to incur in order to comply with an estimated 130,000 pages of Medicare-related regulations. Now they will not only see the sheer quantity of those regulations ratchet up exponentially, but they’ll have to pay even higher taxes to support direct competition to their companies by the government.

All of which is to say that private insurers are going to have a very hard time competing against their own government, leading to the very real potential down the road for a sole U.S. healthcare insurance provider – “Mama Sam.”

And corporations that already provide insurance, or don't, will be forced to pay even more to the government in order to cover the cost of bringing all the uninsured under the umbrella.

Again quoting politico.com...

R. Bruce Josten, a lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said: “We are disappointed, clearly.” He participated in weekly meetings with Kennedy’s committee, and the bill that resulted suggests “the only person who has skin in the game is the employers,” Josten said.
Josten is, of course, talking his own book. That's because employers – i.e., corporations – don't actually pay taxes. Consumers do when they purchase the products of those companies, whose costs are calibrated to cover expenses such as taxes. And so, American industry will have to raise the cost of its products, making them less competitive on the global stage.

This reduced competitiveness will result in American corporations going out of business, and more and more people will be added to the unemployment rolls, moving them out of the category of "net contributors" to the new healthcare system and into the category of "net recipients," sending costs ever higher.

Of course, one way that the government, having laid this bed of nails, might decide to respond is by adding entry barriers for foreign-made goods. Which, when you think about it, may be the solution to the automobile conundrum as well?

I'm not sure where one goes to school to learn the fine art of central planning, or even if such a school exists, but I'm fairly sure that even the best of such a school can adequately train its graduates in the effective, long-term, micromanagement of a complex system such as the U.S. economy – or any economy, for that matter.

Is there a potential bright spot for investors in all of this? I think passing of this healthcare legislation, which is a near certainty given the Democrats’ majority, will shake out the weaker insurance companies already buried under mountains of bad investments that are about to get a lot badder. And I have to believe that unless and until Mama Sam passes legislation prohibiting private insurance altogether, there will be a niche for an insurance company that charges very high premiums but promises quick care of the highest quality in return.

Faced with the alternatives of doing business with the upscale private provider or the far less expensive government option (or one of the private companies that try to compete on price with that entity), the bulk of individuals with pre-existing conditions or generally poor health will choose the less expensive option.

Now, I know this whole thing about universal healthcare will strike a negative chord with many of you, including many of our neighbors to the north. And, please don’t think of me as hard hearted. But this gets back to the idea of positive vs. negative rights. If you believe that we the people have the inalienable right to healthcare, then you might as well believe that we also have the right to three square meals a day, a respectable roof over the head, dental care, a top-quality education, a decent wardrobe, transportation to get to our jobs, day care for the kids, and so on and so forth.

The problem is, and always will be, how can you pay for all of this without coercively taking the money out of one family’s pocket in order to shift it into another’s? And by coercively, I mean the direct threat of imprisonment if you don’t hand over the cash. That violates the morally correct right that we should be free from threats of personal harm, extortion, and outright theft.

In fact, the very idea that some faceless government functionary can walk into my house, or my office, at any time and on any pretense and require me to spend my time and resources assisting him in going over my books so that he may demand more money from me – money that will then flow through the machine to be used to purposes I find personally abhorrent -- is a truly warped and disturbing concept.

At least with a consumption tax, you can make a voluntary decision as to which products you buy, with full knowledge of the taxes you’ll also pay. That is very much not the case with income taxes, property taxes, estate taxes, etc., ad nauseam.

Don’t get me started…

No More Big Bucks for You!

For today’s catalogue of evidence that we’re heading toward a centrally planned economy, I provide the following from Bloomberg this week…

Now, far be it from me to champion the insane pay levels of public company officers. But to actually get into the trenches and try to engineer those pay levels to something considered more politically correct strikes me as a serious step in the wrong direction. Shareholders of companies, which these days are mostly mutual funds and other institutions, need to pay a lot more attention to compensation practices than they obviously have been. And if they are too lazy to do so, then they deserve what they get, should they fail to get a level of corporate performance reflecting said pay.

Fortunately, We Have the Law

I wish I could stop there, but I can't. That's because this week, the faint glimmer of hope evaporated that I had felt when the Supreme Court put a halt to the Chrysler bankruptcy so that it might study the legality of the structure the government had imposed on the company’s stakeholders.

The claims of the secured bondholders in that company were – by tradition and legal rights that extend literally back to the beginning of America and to English law before that – superior to the unsecured claims of the union pension operators. Nevertheless, they were ignored and their legitimate claims set aside "for the public good."

Again, my sympathy goes out to pensioners who dedicated their working lives to a company whose executives may have been better qualified as washroom attendants. But to let one's emotions (or political ambitions) willy-nilly trump well-established law seems the height of insanity.

How, now that the precedent has been re-set, are bond investors – or, for that matter, any stakeholder in a company – supposed to evaluate the investments being offered to them? When commercial obligations can be tossed out the window for political expediency, what does that do to the legal certainty that is supposed to be such a big competitive advantage for America?

Commenting on the transaction, an official of the Treasury, which strong-armed the deal into existence, had this to say…

“This morning’s closing represents a proud moment in Chrysler’s storied history. The Chrysler-Fiat alliance has now exited the bankruptcy process and is poised to emerge as a competitive, viable automaker.”
Since we are relying on dictionaries today, let’s look up the word “proud” just to be sure we are understanding this member of officialdom clearly.

Relying on Webster this time,

prūd,

prod, prud, prou

prode

“Advantageous?” Sure, for the unions and, by extension, the political fortunes of Mr. Obama.

“Just?” Hardly. How is it that the unions put up nothing and get 55% of the company?

“Wise?” Politically, maybe. But turning commercial law on its head to try and bail out a twice bankrupt company? And handing the “new” company another $6 billion of money the government very much doesn’t have as an “exit” gift hardly seems intelligent, at least to me.

“Bold?” In my book, that is not the word I would use to describe the government’s bullying tactics, including publicly vilifying legitimate bond holders.

No, proud is not a word I would associate with this takeover. Expedient, reckless, capricious… all of those words seem far more appropriate.

This is one of those seminal events that has the potential to be with us for a very long time – in future bankruptcy proceedings, which I expect we'll see a lot of – and in the very structure of capital markets.

Capital Gains… What Capital Gains?

David M., the coordinator of our SoCal Phyle, sent along an interesting essay written by Chriss Street, the treasurer/tax collector of Orange County, California. He argues against states spending beyond their means, and also against a bailout of the states by the federal government. The essay is worth reading, and you can do so here.

I thought the following excerpt from Street’s essay is especially noteworthy, given the coming increase in capital gains taxes…

All of which raises the question, where is California going to get the money it needs to dig itself out of its current hole… now expected to ring in at about $25 billion for the year?

Why, Mama Sam, of course.

The Road Less Traveled

While we don’t talk about it much, I feel compelled to give a tip of the hat to our senior researchers who think nothing of hopping on planes to far corners of the world, literally risking the worst in their quest for opportunities ahead of the crowd.

What compels me this week was a trip to Colombia Louis James of our International Speculator just returned from. Accompanied by heavy security, he walked the ground on a new discovery with the credible potential to host five million high-grade ounces of gold, and maybe more.

While the armed escort is still advisable in those parts, it is increasingly becoming less so and is mostly just a holdover from the bad old days of the 1990s at this point. Back then, the area Louis visited was bristling with guerillas and out-of-control paramilitary groups who, some say, were even worse. Today it’s peaceful, and the locals couldn’t be happier to see a new gold rush. Colombia has a truly fabled history in gold mining, and it is now politically stable and pro-business – perhaps the most pro-business country in South America. This has led to big profits for investors in successful junior gold explorers (the company Louis visited saw its share price shoot up 104.5% in two days).

Louis will report on the opportunities he found on his trip to Colombia in the next issue of the International Speculator. You can learn more by clicking here.

There is much opportunity, even in challenging markets… but sometimes nothing but putting your boots on the ground will do. And for being ever willing to do that, my hats off to the tireless team!

21 Economic Models Explained

(Thanks to our regular correspondent and longtime friend, “the General,” for sending this along. Sorry if this gores anyone’s ox… or, cow, such as the case may be.)

SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbor.

COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk.

FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk.

NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you.

BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk
away.

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
You sell them and retire on the income.

SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow has dropped dead.

ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND VENTURE CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.
The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows.
No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.

A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organize a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called “Cowkimon” and market it worldwide.

A GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You reengineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don’t know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.

A RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You count them and learn you have five cows.
You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 2 cows.
You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5,000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.

A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.

AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No one believes you, so they bomb the crap out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least you are now a democracy.

AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.

A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive.

Promoting Free Market Economics…

By Louis James

As you may recall, Doug Casey joined me in my yearly teaching sabbatical in Eastern Europe last summer (click here for last August’s report on how it went). It was a smashing success, and the students had such a good time learning about free enterprise and entrepreneurship, most of them are returning this year and bringing friends. The result is a record group of students – about 90 – who will come to learn more about rational economics, creating businesses, investing, and more, at what we now are proud to be able to call the first Casey Youth Conference on Liberty and Entrepreneurship (CYCLE), to be held from June 29 to July 5, in beautiful Trakai, Lithuania.

This year, they’ll have to write a complete business plan to complete the course – we’re excited. The students are as well and are building a web site for CYCLE. It’s still in beta-testing as we go to press, but you can try it here: CYCLE.

Doug sees CYCLE as one of the most cost-effective ways to teach young people about free-market economics, and better yet, to enable them to join the producers and creators in the world who make progress possible. Eastern Europeans have living memory of soul-crushing communism, and they are hungry for this sort of learning – it’s a great environment. In fact, if you have college-age children who would like to join in, drop us a line at feedback@caseyresearch.com, and we may be able to squeeze in a few who can pay their own way.

When we wrote about this last summer, several subscribers wrote to ask how they could help. One simple way to do this is to make a tax-deductible contribution to the same non-profit we are working with to run our CYCLE program. That’s the International Society for Individual Liberty (ISIL), a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Doug generally believes most charities aren’t worth the dynamite it would take to blow them up, but CYCLE is an educational investment with potentially near- to mid-term returns. And if you’re going to pay for something, it’s nice to be able to take half that money out of the government’s pockets in order to do so. To pitch in, click here for ISIL’s secure donation page or call ISIL directly at 707-746-8796 and tell them you’d like to support CYCLE.

The programs is very cost effective – about $150 per student (they pay part of the cost) – but there are a lot of students this year, so CYCLE could use your help. Thanks!

Miscellany

More Casey Phyles Starting Up. If you are interested in meeting up and sharing notes with other Casey subscribers, this week we received indications of interest from individuals in the following locales. South Africa, New York (Manhattan), Massachusetts, South Carolina, France and Chicago. If you are in any of those places and want to be connected, drop us a note at phyles@CaseyResearch.com.
Poker, Anyone? Our own Doug Casey, who is known to enjoy a game or two of cards now and again, forwarded me an article from the Wall Street Journal about a grab by the Feds of 27,000 bank accounts totaling $34 million. The sole rationale for the grab was that the miscreants apparently had the gall to enjoy playing poker online. What’s next? Users of online adult sites pop to mind. Then what? The slippery slope gets more slippery by the day. You can read the full article here.
IMF Gold Sales. This just in from our Washington correspondent, Don Grove, who is keeping a sharp eye on the proposed vote to allow the IMF to sell on the order of 13,000,000 ounces of gold (to the Chinese).
The Daily Room Thing… Thanks to all of you who weighed in on the idea of converting this letter from a weekly to a daily room. The vote came in slightly in favor of keeping this a weekly. Even so, I think we’ll try going daily for awhile (but not until a couple of weeks from now.) For one thing, there is so much that I could, and even should, be addressing that trying to cram it into one issue at the end of the week is impossible.

Currently, I think that we would segment the daily room (name still not decided), by major topic areas. For instance, commodities, energy, equities, the economy and, of course, politics (with some miscellaneous scattered throughout). We would then focus on those major sectors on the same day each week. Thus, if energy was not of interest to you, you could just skip Tuesday, for instance. In this way, we could focus our research a bit more on what’s important in each of these key areas, while keeping the segments shorter. For fans of the weekly version, at the end of the week, we could do a round-up edition.

Hate the idea? Like it? All input always welcomed at david@caseyresearch.com (though I apologize profusely for being a poor correspondent of late. While I have read all of your emails, I just haven’t had the time to respond.)

Speaking of The Room… this week is my wife’s much-deserved annual road trip, a wonderful week during which I play full-time father and relearn to appreciate what it’s like to manage a household 24/7. If history is any guide, the week will start out with a fair amount of chaos but eventually settle into something resembling order. In any event, Casey Research CEO Olivier Garret has gallantly offered to step in and write The Room next week, while I concentrate on the simple things – like not burning down the house with that new wood-burning tool I bought the kids.

As I sign off, I see that the stock market is just barely keeping its lips above the water line. I continue to believe that a big wave is about to change things, and fairly soon. There are now so many new and existing negatives looming over the market that it can’t be overly long before Mr. Market runs for cover. Among the things to watch for is a surge in commercial mortgage defaults, which are anticipated to almost double from recent months, to some 4.1% of the total outstanding.

(In The Casey Report, we are currently shorting two especially ripe commercial real estate companies… you can, too… details here.)

Then there is the pending wave of Option ARM resets, which will hit later this summer and then soar into next year.

And there is the soon-to-be-widely-reported-on smack up the side of the head to mortgage originations, caused by the recent 75 to 100 basis point jump in mortgage rates.. a jump that occurred over the period of a week and a half. Speaking with insiders in the banking business who shall be unnamed, I learned that the rate increase caused mortgage originations to hit the proverbial wall. Full stop. While the punditry has begun to comment on the likely impact of the jump in rates, when the full extent of the impact becomes apparent in the weeks ahead, it will send a signal that Mr. Market will surely not appreciate.

Rates are going up, and we are positioning ourselves to take full advantage in The Casey Report.

Meanwhile, U.S. exports continue to fall, Treasuries continue to come under pressure as Russia and other countries announce they are going to invest in IMF paper vs. that of the U.S.

And one more thing, especially interesting, that came my way via Steve H. It is about a meeting on June 16 by senior officials of the BRIC nations, in a remote mountain resort in Russia. The concern is that they are working on plans to replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

Start by watching this somewhat odd video linked here…

The presenter comes across as something of an odd duck, and so I asked Steve (who is a very successful money manager and a very solid guy) if the guy was credible. Here’s his response:

www.comdig.com

www.deanlebaron.com

www.leadership.gather.com

So, I did a bit of looking around and found this reference on the pending meeting, from the Beijing Review.

Now, it is a bit of a leap to think that this meeting will indeed amount to a Bretton Woods II, but without the U.S. in the room… you can bet the dollar will be on the agenda.

Interesting times, indeed.

And with that, I must run… I think I smell smoke.

Until the week after next, thank you for reading and for being a subscriber to a Casey Research service.

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 01/23/09

David Galland — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:39:00 GMT

January 23, 2009

Dear Readers,

Like a runaway train, the crisis is heading at breakneck speed down the hill and towards the next sharp turn.

Though we are reasonably sure about the ultimate destination – an inflationary wreck – we can’t be entirely sure what exactly awaits around the next corner. Is it a reasonably long straightaway that gently slopes upward for a spell, allowing the train to slow to a safer speed? Or is it a broken trestle bridge hanging over a gap a mile wide and a mile deep?

Some typically random thoughts on the topic…

Obama at the Bat

As you don't need me to tell you, Obama's coronation, complete with a full court of princes, princesses, and even a couple of jesters, was greeted by the massive crowd with rousing choruses of God Save Obama... but by the financial markets with a sharp sell-off.

Since then, the market has struggled to do its part in heralding in the new American Era, managing, so far, to muster only a tepid one-day blip. Meanwhile, the economic news just gets worse. And worse.

This has investors keyed up and waiting in a nervous state of anticipation for Team Obama to step up to the home plate.

Given all that is at stake, when Team Obama eventually emerge from their many collaborations and deliberations to make the BIG announcement on their plans to save the world, we suspect they will be carrying a very big bat. As the new Treasury secretary stated, the plan they’ll present will be “dramatic.”

That leads us to conclude that one of two scenarios must almost surely follow...

Scenario One: They announce something that is so large it blows the mind and settles the markets. Evidence of this scenario being the one unfolding would be if, on hearing the details of the New Deal, your reaction were something along the lines of… "Wow, I can't believe they'd go that far, but I guess it's the kind of medicine needed just now."

At which point my guess is that the financial markets would take a deep breath and the Obama rally would start, giving the global economy an early spring break.

Scenario Two: Obama strikes out. They step up to the plate with a flimsy little bat that the next hard pitch shatters into small pieces that fly into the eyes of the crowd. A lot of arm waving occurs as the global economic train rounds the bend and spots the abyss just ahead. Positioned as they are in the engine at the front of the train, Team Obama start to frantically grab for levers, sparks fly, a fire breaks out, smoke, brakes screaming, people ducking for cover… you get the idea.

Which way do I personally think things will break? I quote myself from the July 18, 2008 edition of this column/blog thingy.

So, here we are. As predicted back in July, Obama has been sworn in and he is working on a New Deal. Further, this New Deal will almost certainly be geared entirely toward increasing, not decreasing, the weight of government on the economy.

With that view in mind, one might lean toward Scenario One… yet I have a hard time imagining what the government can do at this point that could be so BIG that they’ll be able to smooth the global waters and mollify the restless masses. Especially with such a steady drumbeat of bad news coming from both the U.S. and overseas… the UK, China, Eurozone, Japan, etc., etc., etc.

That I can’t envision such a plan at this very moment is only because my imagination hasn’t been sufficiently amped up with enough coffee this morning. And so, with the benefit of another shot of espresso, I remember that the U.S. government can do pretty much anything it wants, short of opening up concentration camps, and get away with it… for a time at least.

In fact, with a bit more effort, I do see one plan shaping up that might, just might, do the trick.

And that is for the U.S. government to set up a new operation with a forward-looking title such as “The Economic Recovery Corporation of America.” All of the nation’s banks and any other institution deemed “important” by the administration would earn shares in this new entity by handing over the toxic assets that now pollute their portfolios.

With all its wisdom, the U.S. government would provide management expertise to work the paper out over time, keeping the new “Bad Bank” afloat in the interim with government guarantees. To the extent that the government actually has to make good on any of its guarantees, it would recoup the losses taken prior to the contributing institutions receiving any share of the proceeds from the liquidations. To help get this idea through Congress, the Treasury would set a realistic time table for the workout – say, ten years – and confidently project that the new entity would ultimately make money from its activities.

Of course, there would be a lot of detailed work to make this idea work, but the plan – which has already been hinted at by members of the administration – could be packaged in such a way that it could be deemed acceptable even to members of Congress, despite the hefty price tag.

As to the size of that price tag, the outstanding toxic paper on the books of the banks is currently estimated at somewhere between one and two trillion smackers.

“But Congress would never pass another big bailout to the greedy banks!” some would say.

To which I might reply, “For Bush, you are right. He had burned through all his goodwill. But at this early stage in his administration, provided the thing was properly packaged with an extra big helping of spin, our shiny new president can get pretty much anything he wants.”

So, that is how Scenario One might come to pass; a national Get Out of Jail Free card for banks. Followed, I suspect, by governments around the world quickly following suit. Problem solved, crisis over. The Obama rally starts and the world enjoys several months of respite before the hard reality that this thing is far, far from over smacks the global economy up the side of the head. More on that in a moment.

But what about Scenario Two – Obama strikes out? It could very well happen. People are very skittish just now. If history has repeatedly demonstrated anything, it is that governments are heavily prone to miscalculation. In the current situation, should they propose a plan that leaves people muttering to themselves, “What? That’s it? You must be kidding!” the retribution would come hard and fast.

Unfortunately, until we actually hear the details of “the plan” – which should be announced relatively soon – we simply can’t know which way things are going to break.

There are, however, a couple of things that I think we can be pretty sure of, in either scenario.

Gold soars. In Scenario One, the market will correctly see the fresh wave of new money as inflationary – as it has at virtually every new bailout announcement over the last six months – and send gold spiking upwards. In Scenario Two, the scramble for safety triggered by the looming abyss will likewise send people scrambling for gold. Going out on the limb a bit, I’m going to guess that gold is headed over $1,000 within the next month or three.

There will be a crash, regardless. All Scenario One does is postpone, and for not very long (three months?), the day of reckoning. It does nothing to actually resolve the massive misallocation of capital built up over decades of excessive spending and debt creation. The plan, at least as I envision it, just assures that the government’s debt soars even further. And, should it succeed in actually getting banks to loan and strapped consumers to borrow again… it just exacerbates the situation.

In addition to gold, I also think there are going to be some spectacular trading opportunities coming up, opportunities we are well geared up to take advantage of with our new Casey Trend Trader service.

It is now up and running, but heretofore, only for our Alert subscribers. A broader release on the service will be out soon… it is temporarily hung up in some minor administrative details related to the announcement itself. Watch for it.

Swearengen on the New Administration

Last week I reprinted a rather strongly worded and entirely unflattering farewell to George Bush by my dear friend and business partner, Doug Casey.

In response, I received several strongly worded emails from readers, including one from a Vietnam vet who threatened to beat me up for, I guess, exercising the right of free speech that soldiers are regularly attributed with fighting for. Oh, well.

In that, in the same edition, I expressed some skepticism about the economy’s prospects under the Obama administration, I also received several emails from readers suggesting we get on board with the Obama express… emphatically stating that we owe the guy a decent chance to fix things.

While I think I have tried to be fair in my assessment of what we might expect of Obama, I will accept that, even at this early point in his administration, I am skeptical.

To help explain why, I will take a roundabout approach by stating that Doug and I share a passion for the now canceled HBO series Deadwood.

Deadwood, about the founding and early days of that infamous Wild West town, is not for everyone, due primarily to equal parts sex, violence, and truly obscene language. Yet if you can get past the first couple of episodes – and almost no one I know other than Doug has – the degraded milieu of the show begins to grow on you. Especially when you realize that the writers regularly use iambic pentameter to express their most colorful language.

So, other than being aficionados of violent westerns (Doug's favorite movie of all time is The Wild Bunch, and I cast top ten votes for The Outlaw Josey Wales and The Searchers), what does this have to do with anything?

Stick with me for a minute, because there was a scene in Deadwood that struck me as relevant given this week's inauguration of Mr. Obama.

The set up is that Al Swearengen, the hard case who was instrumental in the founding of Deadwood, finds his turf being cut into by George Hearst, the scion of the Hearst dynasty who is trying to hone in on the nearby Homestake Mine, the biggest of the Black Hills mines, and one of the largest in North America. Hearst is a hard-charging bull who knows what he wants, and what he wants, he gets (in real life, he ended up buying Homestake in 1877 for $70,000... in today's money, that's $1,347,705).

In any event, Hearst sends a flunky over to Al Swearengen's saloon and invites him to his hotel room for a pow wow about the future of Deadwood, a future he very much wants to control. When the meeting doesn't go exactly as Hearst intends, he has his henchmen grab Al, hold his hand down on a table, remove a couple of fingers with a bowie knife, then toss him out on the street.

About a week later, Hearst decides he wants to meet again with Swearengen. And so he sends the same flunky back to Swearengen’s saloon to request that Al, once again, follows the flunky back to a meeting with Hearst.

Upon hearing the request for a second meeting, Swearengen, his hand still swaddled in bandages, raises one eyebrow skeptically and says the immortal words, "Why, the must take me for an optimist."

Well, given my life experience to date, an experience that has involved watching a succession of presidents pursuing policies that have each, in turn, increased both the size of government and its many obligations to the point where we are now on the brink of the worst financial debacle since the nation’s founding, you will excuse me if, when asked by anyone to grab hands around Obama's campfire, my mind returns to Swearengen’s words, "Why, the must take me for an optimist."

But wait, say Obama's many fans, he's different! He really will change things!

To which I reply: Bush’s inauguration, $40 million (a ridiculous amount); Obama's, $170 million (an insane amount). I would have been impressed if he had a modest affair in the Rose Garden, with a modest little wine and cheese served afterward. But $170 million?

It says to me like little else can that the new administration is, at the least, still living in the past – a past marked by excesses in all things.

And so, for the time being, like Al, I am going to have to be convinced by something other than words.

Leaving off on the topic, other than the sheer spectacle and Obama’s seemingly well-practiced, beatific countenance as he walked toward the inaugural podium, the thing that jumped out at me the most was when a camera zoomed in on a T-shirt that was apparently quite popular with the crowd, and that is pictured here.

Skepticism aside, I sincerely do hope that Obama does a better than average job… but yet, I can’t help but find the expectations inherent in the iconography that surrounds the man deeply concerning. The higher the expectations, the harder the fall.

The Continuing Crisis

Item One: Real Estate Still in Real Trouble. I can remember some years ago being shown a fixer-upper selling for $750,000 in a neighborhood near the San Francisco airport where one would have to be stupid or well armed to go out after nightfall. My, what a difference a few years make. This from Bloomberg…

Jan. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Home prices in the San Francisco Bay Area fell 44 percent last month from a year earlier as discounted, foreclosed properties lured buyers, MDA DataQuick said.
In a conversation this week with real estate pro Andy Miller, he shared his view that there is literally nothing, but nothing, that any government body in the world can do about real estate until values fall to the point where equilibrium returns. And we are nowhere near that point. It doesn’t hurt to be looking for that dream property you have always wanted, but the smart money is holding off buying… probably through the end of this year. (As all real estate is local, there will of course be exceptions.)

Item Two: Let's Piss Off China! In his Senate confirmation hearing, Treasury secretary nominee Timothy Geithner went on record that… “President Obama – backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists – believes that China is manipulating its currency.” Adding, “The new economic team will forge an integrated strategy on how best to achieve currency realignment in the current economic environment.”

This audience, more than most, is aware of the fact that foreigners – led by China – were responsible for buying something like 80% of the U.S. Treasury bonds sold over the last couple of years. So, naturally, it makes perfect sense that the likely new Treasury secretary would come out of the starter’s gate with tough words for China, even though buyers will have to be found for record quantities of Treasuries in the months just ahead.

The distinguished New York Congressman Charles Rangel seconded Geithner by warning that, “What they can’t work out diplomatically, we can work out legislatively.”

See my earlier remarks on governments serially making miscalculations.

Item Three: What Price Oil? I recently commented on the fact that the price of many things has either already fallen, or soon will fall, below the cost of production. On that general topic, regular correspondent and über-researcher Marko F. of Canaccord sent along the following item this week.

The IMF recently compiled a list of break-even prices that various oil-producing nations require in order to avoid a budget deficit in 2009. Those figures are as follows: Bahrain $84, Kuwait $34, Oman $78, Qatar $24, Saudi Arabia $54, United Arab Emirates $24, Algeria $60, Azerbaijan $35, Iran $90 (!), Iraq ($94), Kazakhstan $67, and Libya $53.
While there is some internal debate here at Casey Research on the outlook for oil prices, my personal sense is that it is approaching oversold. One of many recent developments in the energy scene supporting that view occurred this week when we learned that the output at PEMEX, Mexico’s state oil company, fell 9 percent in 2008. This is, unfortunately, a trend solidly in motion: from its peak production of 3.8 million barrels per day in 2004, Mexican production is now ringing in at just 2.8 million bbl/d, a startling drop of 1 million bbl/d in just four years.

The consequences of this decline are serious, starting with the simple fact that the already embattled Mexican government derives over 40% of its revenue from PEMEX. As the underlying cause of the production decline is that the giant Cantarell field is well past peak, this is not a situation that will be quickly or easily resolved.

While this heightens the odds that Mexico will become a failed state, it also supports Jeffrey Brown’s time line that by 2014 – if not sooner – Mexico will stop exporting oil.

So, sure, oil and gas might stay under pressure for a bit longer… but the time will come, and probably sooner rather than later, when you’ll want to begin positioning yourself for some exceptional contrarian profits.

Casey Energy Opportunities

The Casey Report

Casey Research Crisis & Opportunity Summit

more info here

Item Four: Car, Anyone? In a recent edition of these weekly musings, I mentioned that, while flying into Newark recently, I could see a sea of unsold cars waiting on the dock of the port. Apparently, this is a growing problem, as you can see for yourself by clicking this link.

Item 5: Credit Denied. Regular correspondent Jeff B. sent this along earlier today.

Item 6: Who’s at Fault? This just in from Casey Research Washington correspondent, Don Grove.

Item 7: Next, It Gets Ugly. There was an interesting article in the Times of London this week on the growing number of violent protests flaring up around the world. Here’s an excerpt.

And here’s a link to the full article.

A sign of times to come? I think the answer is, yes… especially as more and more people hit the unemployment lines.

Item 8: The Unemployment Lines. John Mauldin, who has just signed on as a faculty member for our March 20-22 Crisis & Opportunity Summit, puts out an excellent weekly letter, titled Out of the Box (more here http://www.investorsinsight.com/). In his latest edition, he sheds some useful light on the government’s prettied-up employment statistics. Here’s the quote:

There is much more I could include under the topic “The Continuing Crisis,” but time and space prohibits it.

From the big-picture perspective, while one should practice optimism at every chance in everyday life – life is much happier that way – when it comes time to roll up your sleeves and work on your finances, pessimism remains the word of the day… and likely, the week, month, and year as well.

In time this storm will pass, just not real soon, and not because some government spokesperson – no matter how well spoken – says it has.

Crisis & Opportunity Summit Update – Going, Going…

There are a couple of important developments to share in regards to the upcoming Casey Research Crisis & Opportunity Summit, being held at the beautiful Four Seasons in Las Vegas, March 20-22.

The first is that the Summit is now more than half sold out, despite almost no marketing on the event (we wanted to hold off until the first draft of the schedule was ready).

Further, the deeply discounted room block at the Four Seasons at $195 a night, versus an amount normally almost twice that – is almost sold out (we are trying to negotiate for more).

And finally, the aforementioned schedule is now finished. While discussions continue with several additional individuals we are determined to land as faculty – including Congressman Ron Paul and former GAO Comptroller David Walker – the line-up as it now stands is, I think, exceptional. By the time the event is over, participants will come away well armed with the hard facts and specific knowledge needed to both persevere and prosper in the crisis now unfolding. While our various services will provide you with most of what you need to know to stay ahead of the crowd, the added advantage of this Summit is that it allows you to get the answers to all your many questions, in a collegial and almost familial setting.

In any event, I’m not going to pitch you hard on attending; rather, I wanted to let you know that if you might be interested in attending, you can now view the schedule by clicking this link.

Then, act quickly if you want to attend… this event will, without question, sell out.

Hope to see you there!

And That’s It for This Week…

As I wrap up this week, I see that the stock market is trying to end the week on a softer note, and the Dow is down only 57 points. But, whoa Nelly! Gold is up strongly, up $37.60 to $896.40. Per above, I am increasingly convinced we’re on our way back over $1,000.

For those of you who appreciate the musical selections I share now and again, I was just listening to Tori Amos’ song Cornflake Girl, a soft classic. I went looking for the song on YouTube to share it with you and came across the following video of her doing a live performance. While I like the song on the original album, until seeing this video I had never seen her perform… which, after watching her cavorting about the stage, I am now fairly sure I never will. But she has musical skills, I’ll give her that. Here’s the (strange) link.

For something entirely different, a couple of you have sent me a link to a fantastic video commentary on the bailout by Fred Thompson. Well worth a watch. Here it is… http://blip.tv/file/1528079

And that, dear readers, is that for this week.

Be of good cheer… why not?

Thanks for reading and for sharing this journey with us.

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.