The Japanese Economic Dilemma in a Nutshell

Here is a note from a friend in Japan:

In today's Nikkei (Japanese version), on page 5, tucked behind all the hype about the government's decision to lower corporate taxes, in hopes that major companies will raise wages, was a short article on "three miscalculations about the economy" this year.

1. Tax revenues increased with the increase in the sales tax but consumer spending fell. Tax revenues expected to increase by about 5 trillion yen.

2. Weaker yen and higher stock market improved family assets for some I would say, but exports did not improve, and were about 8% lower than 4 years ago.

3. CPI (excluding fresh food) increased, resulting in a real wage decline. Rreal wages have been falling since mid 2013 and are now around 4% lower year over year.

Over the past few days I have been reading about the so-called lost decade of the 1990s and the government's policy decisions to try to kick-start the economy.

In 1990 the government had about 60 trillion in tax revenues and 69 trillion in general account total expenditures.

Now, the government estimates 52 trillion in tax revenues for fiscal 2014 but has more than 95 trillion in expenditures.

Even a second grade student can see that something is not working.

As you know, I think that there are three things that must be done.

Reform, reform, reform.

The Japanese economy is burdened with an unusually bad demographic problem, made much worse by the burdens of insider dealing, crony capitalism, and zombie banks and their corporations.

And its greatest burden of all is an elite that serves itself and its friends first and foremost, and that finds a greater kinship with its global counterparts than with the people whose interests it purports to represent.

 

"The conflict between the East and West was designed to scare the people of the world into accepting a convergence of these two monopoly systems of authoritarian power. The end result was to be a new Imperial Order and a New World Empire run by an elite self-perpetuating oligarchies from the leading nations of the earth."

Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 860

 

Related:

Princes of the Yen: Central Banks and the Transformation of an Economy

Why the (Global) Kleptocrats Do Not Want a Recovery

The Pursuit of Global Corporatism

Princes of the Yen: Central Banks and the Transformation of an Economy

"Central banks have the power to create economic, political and social change. This is how they do it."

While I cringed at some of the early parts of the film and the mid-century American attitudes towards the Japanese, even if it was in the aftermath of a long and viciously fought war, I think this documentary provides some valuable insights into the evolution of the modern economy that is Japan.  I direct your attention to the things that we are often saying about different peoples today.

 

I struggle very hard not to judge other periods, cultures, and people with a righteous and twice removed temporal prejudice, enhanced by distance and hindsight.  And I believe such liberality might serve us well, given that we will most likely appear like blundering, hapless baboons to our great grandchildren some day.  What were they thinking!?

 

As a general observation based on experience, people everywhere are just people. Unless you are wearing the goggles of ignorance, fear, and hatred. And wicked men in business and government often encourage that sort of thing for their own ends.   But, in the end, the madness serves only itself.

 

But some cultures do tend to encourage and reward certain traits of personality and behavior more than others.  This has deep roots in their cultural, social, and religious heritage.  So the same economic conditions in two different cultures might provide two very different outcomes.

I recall explaining some of this to a professor from England whom we had in business school.  He could not quite understand how some of the things that were happening in Japan (Japan Inc. as it was known then) that ought not to be occurring in a two party system. The answer of course was that Japan at that time, in the early 1990's, was essentially a single party system with heavy ties to an embedded bureaucracy in partnership with corporate cartels.  And Richard Werner does a fairly good job at describing the evolution and nature of that system.

I think this structure helps to explain the long economic stagnation in Japan that puzzles so many, and has the Keynesians so befuddled.   They have never met any stimulus that they didn't like, even when it was being poured into and abused by a corrupt and inefficient system. 

 

Rather than being naturally more successful at its financial engineering, as fellows like Bernanke have snarkily suggested in their American exceptionalism,  I think it is becoming painfully obvious that the US is 'turning Japanese' in its serial policy errors propagated by an insular, ruling elite and the moneyed interests with their political power.

 

Speaking of financial engineering, Professor Richard Werner has been a long time economic advisor to Japan, and coined the term quantitative easing for his recommendations to them.

 

Japan, and the 'Asian tigers' as well, were mercantilist in their outlook and crony capitalist in their composition.  The enormous amounts of monetary stimulus were dissipated in supporting zombie corporations, a ruling elite, unproductive investments, and widespread soft corruption and insider dealing.

To engage in 'free trade agreements' under these circumstances with other command and control economies is foolish, especially when it puts domestic labor, social services, and the environment at par.  Especially when such processes are disguised under layers of complex rules and commissions, and easily manipulated by global corporations.   These are the bonds of global repression of the common people by concentrated power.

 

It rips the heart out of local autonomy and democracy under the banner of 'competitiveness.' It is corrosive of precious freedoms, and tramples the Constitution. But money has helped to ease the consciences of Western politicians.

Even moreso, can there be any doubt that the US, rather than helping to provide a positive example of a different way to Asia, inculcating freedom through its success of democratic and free markets, is in fact falling into the same model, a kind of a lowest common denominator of inverted totalitarianism under the standard of globalization.

 

I would like to think that Chalmers Johnson would most likely agree that if the Bank of Japan's economists are indeed the 'princes of the yen,' this is because they are now and have long been liege lords in the Empire of the American Dollar and the Anglo-American banking cartel.

Currency Wars: The Plot Thickens

"International discord over Ukraine does not bode well for the settlement of differences over the IMF’s future. Though the G7 is excluding Russia from its number, in retaliation for its action in Crimea, this does not amount to isolating Russia. There has been no suggestion that Russia be excluded from the G20.

The USA and its allies have suspected that several other G20 members would not stand for it. This suspicion was confirmed yesterday when the BRICS foreign ministers, assembled at the international conference in The Hague, issued a statement condemning ‘the escalation of hostile language, sanctions and counter-sanctions’. They affirmed that the custodianship of the G20 belongs to all member-states equally and no one member-state can unilaterally determine its nature and character. In short, their statement read like a manifesto for a pluralist world in which no one nation, bloc or set of values would predominate...

It now seems unlikely that the USA will complete (or, indeed, begin) legislative action on the IMF reform by the 10 April deadline the BRICS have set. The odds are moving in favour of a showdown at the G20 finance ministers’ and central bank governors’ meeting due in Washington on that date...

Beijing leaders have long dreamt of displacing, or at least dethroning, the US dollar from its reserve currency role. US dominance of the IMF is one of several effective bars to the achievement of such a goal. The kind of action Russia is advocating, the BRICS wresting control of the IMF in despite of US veto power, might have some appeal.

That would mark the end of the unified global monetary system that has developed since the IMF was founded in 1945, to be replaced by a bloc of fiat currencies in the developed countries and a system in the emerging sector where currencies were linked to drawing rights in some new international fund, possibly with some material backing. (gold, silver, and possibly commodities - Jesse)

It seems unlikely that convertibility between these monetary systems could be maintained for long. Consequently, the 10 April meeting is shaping up as a potentially critical juncture in world economic history."

Paul Mylchreest, A Critical Juncture

Paul Mylchreest published this essay over at ZeroHedge this evening, and it is worth a read, as Paul is connecting some fairly important dots for us. I doubt that many traders will really understand the implications of what he is saying, without even having read the comments. Good traders often take a highly focused, very detailed, but narrow and short term view of things, and this is both their strength and their weakness. It deserves a broader stage, but it is unlikely to get it when the major media remains willfully blind.

I had not thought of a dual system previously, in which the Anglo-Americans and their allied states decide to go in one direction, maintaining their hegemony around the dollar and the euro, and the rest of the world going in another. It would be inherently unstable, and throw the global credit and forex markets into a somewhat chaotic state. But then again, who could have predicted the folly of a loosely associated set of nations adopting a single currency without the rigor of monetary transfers and fiscal union with which to balance the system.

This is not likely to be a singular event, but part of an evolutionary change in the makeup of the international monetary system that has been developing for years. At some point things will begin moving more quickly, and change may come in an avalanche of events that will leave most analysts gaping in disbelief.

When do you think the American Revolution began, on 4 July 1776?  Such great turns in human events happen over long periods of time.  But, in retrospect, there are always critical junctures in the process of change, with hard positions taken, and opportunities for peaceful evolution lost.

"All successful revolutions are the kicking in of a rotten door."

John Kenneth Galbraith

And since the grand failure of the Soviet state, nothing has grown more corrupt and self-serving than the ring of corporations and crony capitalists that have become the post Bretton Woods banking cartel. It has begun to consume itself, and to kill its own. The economic hitmen have finally come home.

But predicting 'when' is difficult in matters such as this. What starts the avalanche, what sound triggers the slide, which snowflake proves to be too much?  When is enough wealth and power— enough?

Certainly the events in the Ukraine are difficult to understand without a broader geo-political and economic context, except in the most facile and jingoist of caricatures of different perspectives. They are barbarians, and hate us for our freedom, the wonders of our financial engineering, and the beauty of our culture. We are the liberators. We bring loans and economic progress. We come in peace. Look on our works, ye mighty, and despair.

"Although U.S. Navy and Marine forces generally operate on a regular cycle of deployments to European waters, they rely on a network of permanent bases in the region, especially in the Mediterranean. These should be retained, and consideration given to establishing a more robust presence in the Black Sea. As NATO expands and the pattern of U.S. military operations in Europe continues to shift to the south and east, U.S. naval presence in the Black Sea is sure to increase."  Project For the New American Century, 2000

We are not the makers of history. We are not gods. We are not even the sovereigns of our own passions and delusions and fears.

We who forget history are its victims.

Excerpts of Alleged Letter from Troika to Greece

This appeared today on the web at Zerohedge.  It is a letter purported to be from the Troika to Greece, with the appearance of a set of demands that was leaked by an anonymous source.

If it is legitimate, and that is a big 'if' given the sources, then it is a bit of an eye-opener, perhaps not so much in the terms themselves, but in the level of micro-managing the Troika wishes to impose on a purportedly sovereign people.

As you may recall the Troika are the European Commission (EC), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the European Central Bank (ECB).

From what I have read, the 'bailout' is really a bailout of the debt which is owed to the banks of France and Germany among others, incurred by corrupt administrations heavy with insiders and influenced by banks such as Goldman Sachs, much in the manner of Iceland, Ireland, and other peripheral countries.

The track record of the IMF in such proposed 'reforms' is a national devastation.

I do not believe at all that these measures are stable, practical, or given in good faith as a solution. In other words, they will be back for more. The capitulation on such draconian interference is the path to a parasitic existence, in the manner of the most servile type of colonialism.

Greece might well consider a default on the existing external debts, the issuance of a national currency, reforming the financial system, the imposition of immediate capital controls, democratic safeguards against the rise of extreme domestic elements, and self-sufficiency at any and all costs in the spirit of a war time economy of a nation under siege.

Area: Flexibility of labour arrangements

Measure: Increase flexibility of work schedules:

Increase the number of maximum workdays to 6 days per week for all sectors.

Set the minimum daily rest to 11 hours.

Delink the working hours of employees from the opening hours of the establishment.

Eliminate restrictions on minimum/maximum time between morning and afternoon shifts.

BIS In 380 Tonnes of Gold Swaps; Organized Looting of Sovereign Wealth; No Confidence

"Manipulation can only go so far…..especially when gold is reverting to its primary function which is as a currency in its own right or as means to substantiate existing currencies." Richard Henley Davis

These swaps have significance because of the speculation that the public sale of gold by the IMF, which was secretive and selective, was not a legitimate sale to raise funds, but a means of bailing out the bullion banks who had taken gold previously on lease and sold it into the public markets, but were unble to return it because of the tightness of supply in the physical bullion market, increasingly disconnected from the NY based paper market.

Several private bullion buyers, including Eric Sprott, are reported to have made firm and well priced offers to buy large tranches of gold from the IMF, only to be curtly turned away as 'ineligible.' The IMF is selling at the prices they determine ex-market to the people to whom they wish to sell. It appears that they, and certain European central banks, may be managing this through BIS.

Just as Gordon Brown sold England's gold at artificially low prices to bail out the bullion banks in NY and the City, so the IMF and its constituent members are selling the public stores of gold, largely from a few developed western nations, to support what essentially appears to be a crony capitalist banking fraud involving the secretive sale of public assets at artificial prices with the gains pocketed by a few state-sponsored banks.

"Gold swaps are usually undertaken between monetary authorities. The gold is exchanged for foreign exchange deposits (or other reserve assets) with an agreement that the transaction be unwound at an agreed future date, at an agreed price. The monetary authority acquiring the foreign exchange will pay interest on the foreign exchange received. Gold swaps are typically undertaken when the cash-taking monetary authority has need of foreign exchange but does not wish to sell outright its gold holdings (at least not on their own books - Jesse). In that manner, gold is a leveraging device. Gold swaps sometimes involve transactions where one of the parties is not a monetary authority (usually it is another depository corporation). Gold swaps between monetary authorities do not usually involve the payment of margin."

Repurchase Agreements, Securities Lending, Gold Swaps and Gold Loans, An Update - IMF

Some parties have mistakenly asserted that since a swap is not a lease for accounting purposes, which is quite correct, then the gold could not have been sold. That is just a simplistic misconception. A swap transfers the benefits of the assets from one party to another for a period of time in exchange for interest paid, generally on forex received. Its does not sell the property but it transfers the mineral rights for a time, if you will.

The party that then holds that gold asset can just hold it, or they can utilize it in some way, such as leasing it out for a period of time to another party, like a bullion bank, who can subsequently sell it. These types of 'three way deals' were very commonly seen when Lehman and Bear Stearns started to unravel and they needed ot be unwound, and were a key component of the whole issue of hidden counter party risks. Remember that?

So on the books of the first party there are in fact no leases or sales shown, just swaps of varying duration and terms. But the swap has delivered an asset, in this case gold, into the hands of a party who may have no qualms about leasing that asset out to a third party to obtain funds, and that third party is likely to sell it. I would of course agree that this does not PROVE anything. How can it when the books of some of the parties are still opaque, and audits rarely conducted to verify ownership. But after what we have just seen over the last three years in these games of asset merry-go-round, how can anyone just blatantly dismiss that can and likely is happening, where there is an easy profit to be made. Especially considering the past history of transactions between the bullion banks and the central banks.

Personally I would view this report as bullish for the price of gold, since it is past history, and almost certainly an indication of concerns about Comex offtake. In other words, shortages are appearing, and fresh sources of bullion are becoming increasingly difficult to find.

John Brimelow reports that:

"The news of the day, of course, was the discovery by the Virtual Metals analyst (Matthew Turner) that the BIS engaged in what appears to have been the biggest gold swap in history prior to the end of their FY end on March 31st.

Thebulliondesk.com (first of the wire services to report) says:

“In its 2010 annual report, the BIS said that "gold, which the bank held in connection with gold swap operations, under which the bank exchanges currencies for physical gold," stands at 8,160.1 million in special drawing rights, equivalent to 346 tonnes this year, up from nil in 2009.

While the data is relevant to the end of BIS’ 2010 financial year in March, data posted to the International Monetary Fund and carried by Bloomberg show the swap still growing in April, analyst Andy Smith of Bache Commodities noted.

To now, this implies a swap of about 380 tonnes from the end of 2009, he said in a report.”

The new Washington Agreement, which started at the end of last September, allowed signatories to engage in gold derivative transactions for the first time in a decade. Very convenient.

Although none of the major bullion banks (actual or potential CB counterparties) will want to discuss this, the high probability is that much of this gold was actually sold into the market. Very likely this accounts for the contra-seasonal slump of gold in December, which it will be recalled was neither preceded by the usual loss of physical premiums nor accompanied by the usual open interest action.

This in effect means the end of the Washington Agreement restraint on CB gold selling, at a time when several signatories are in bad shape. Most likely this is what caused the selling pressure in gold today, especially after the NY open."

As we have most recently seen with the bloated CDS and CDO credit markets, long standing control frauds can cause quite a splash when they inevitably collapse. We need to bear this in mind when the governments start making their excuses, once again, for taking the 'necessary actions' to support the banks for the good of the people, from whom they have once again stolen billions to provide a fat living for their friends and themselves.

I have been wondering, as I am sure that you have as well, Why Now? Why did the IMF and BIS 'throw the kitchen sink' at the gold bullion market at this particular time?

I think the answer can be found in the setup of the market. Gold was knocking on the door of resistance at $1260, a key point that could have triggered a break away rally. At the same time, according to figures provided in his daily Comex commentary, there were an extraordinary number of contracts standing for delivery in silver and especially gold. Indeed, if the numbers are correct, a breakaway rally would have encouraged almost 2 million ounces of gold to be demanded of the Comex, a call on their 2.64 million ounces of dealer supply that could have literally 'broken the bank.'

As Volcker and Greenspan have both said, the central banks must stand ready to sell gold into the market to prevent its price from rising and displacing the confidence of the markets in the power of the central banks to manage their currency markets.

Economists are debating the reason why individuals and businesses are saving, and not spending money as a response to the Federal Reserve programs.

Here is a comment I wrote in response to an essay by Brad DeLong in the recent issue of The Economist, Why Are Firms Saving So much? I am not editing it here, and since it was done as an only draft, please bear with its somewhat raw form.

"Private firms and individuals are saving too much. DeLong seems to think they are being irrational, because they are doing so out of fear of a commercial credit crunch.

I think this is partly true. But some of the savings activity by companies (and individuals) is obviously because they are not seeing the turnaround in the economy that would give them the confidence to build up their capacity and inventories. They clearly fear another downturn based on what they are seeing.

Now, Mr. DeLong dismisses this, presumably because there is a central bank called the Fed, and it owns a printing press, and stands ready as a lender of last resort.

I think businesses know this, and the attitude and condescension is wholly unnecessary and distracting from the real issue.

Businesses, and individuals, simply do not believe that the Fed is interested in them, as opposed to let's say, the too big to fail banks. For whatever reason, Bernanke has blown his credibility, and done so most likely by talking a better game than he has played as the lender of last resort to the general economy, and not to a select circle of cronies, among which are not the local and regional banks, and certainly not commercial business.

The other fact, although I confess that I cannot prove it with data, is that the banks have troubles of their own, and prefer to use a portion of their funds for speculation, especially those TBTF fellows who are sitting on a lot of dodgy paper.

And finally, what has really changed in an economy that was almost wholly dependent on stock bubbles and mortgage fraud, and a consumer saturated with debt?

So, history stories notwithstanding, the solution to this might be a little closer to home than one might imagine otherwise from reading Mr. DeLong.

The efforts of the Fed and Treasury have NOT been focused on the locus of commercial transactions between private companies and individuals. Rather they have been preoccupied with the speculation in financial derivatives and paper assets that have little or no real connection anymore to the economy. So how can one even wonder that the people have lost faith in this effort?

Only if one assumes that they are irrational fools, incapable of understanding economics because they, after all, lack the necessary credentials and PhD's, as the Federal Reserve fellow so recently observed."

Despite all their dissembling and market antics, I think the Fed's worst fears are coming true. The people of the US are losing confidence in the Federal Reserve and its economic policies, and those of the Treasury which has badly mishandled the banking crisis. The problem is that Washington is talking to New York, and assuming the rest of the country will accept whatever it is they choose to do.

Crunch time is coming, and it will not be pretty. A loss of confidence and a hoarding of funds in savings is a prelude to Gresham's Law, and the first whiff of what I would have never expected could occur: hyper-inflation, preceded by a terrific market crash in late September. That is just how bad that the policy errors of Summers and Bernanke have been, and how badly the Congressional plutocrats have misunderstood the will of the people and failed to enact reforms.

It is going to be a long, hot summer.

Jim Rickards: Gold, Silver, and a May 11 Meeting to Discuss Global Currency Issues

Gold is showing a potential inverse H&S pattern.



Silver is in a well-defined uptrend.



As are the miners.

But all bets are off for the miners and silver most likely if US equities head south.



Jim Rickards on CNBC discusses the May 11th IMF meeting in Switzerland
to discuss the dollar alternatives, the SDR and gold.

And it is worth watching the reactions of the CNBC anchors to what their guests
have to say, and the elegantly polite way that Rickards deals with Joe Kernen.



It's kind of sad that after all these years Joe Kernen is Becky Quick's assistant.

Doesn't he have seniority or something? Can't Immelt throw him a bone?

Taylored Tales of the Monetary Bards

The title of this blog may appear a bit rude, and it is not intended to be denigrating of this particular paper from the Kansas City Fed linked below, but rather the organizational mindset that uses it to adjust anything more complex than the timing on a 1967 small-block Chevy with a straight face and a clear conscience.

Although a bit wonkish, "Was Monetary Policy Optimal During Past Deflation Scares?" does an exceptionally good job of explaining the Taylor Rule, how it has been derived and is utilized by Central Banks in evaluating and formulating monetary policy, ie., short term interest rate targets. The author gets high marks for clarity of language and a willingness to allude to some of the shortcomings of the method which is remarkable for most Fed research papers.

Financial engineering reminds one of saying we used to have in Bell Labs , when some individual or group was trying to formulate a practical response to a complex problem based on dodgy theories and elaborate field data: "Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a grease pencil, and cut it with a hatchet."

One suspects that in this case, reducing the complexities of the economy to the output gap, real inflation gap, and the equilibrium nominal interest rate is like trying to arrive at the average depth of the ocean by using a micrometer to take a few ocean depth readings in a hurricane.

Yes each component has additional inputs, that vary widely and are difficult to measure, but to paraphrase, it does not matter if you calculation works, as long as it looks good, and darling doesn't this economy look marvelous.

It would be interesting to see the fun that Benoit Mandelbrot would have dissecting the Taylor Rule equation, derived from an 'optimal period' in US monetary policy. His book The The Misbehaviour of Markets is a must read for anyone who needs to be convinced that much of modern financial engineering and risk models are exercises in mathematical oversimplification and misdirection.

For those that are not so inclined to read this paper, let us just say that the data going in to the equation is subject to wide disagreement, adjustment, and interpretation, and the data coming out has enough spread from lack of modeling robustness to support just about anything, any outcome. Given the 'thinness' of the equation, which as the author refreshingly and freely admits, can choose from widely varying measures of 'core inflation,' while taking no account of asset prices and government industrial policy among other things.

I am sure the Board of Governors would respond that this Taylor Rule is merely one input into the collective decision-making of a group of wise men, who at the end of the day are combining their various perspectives into a judgement as to the optimal course of action, which includes their vast experience and readings of not only tools such as this, but anecdotal data from their various regions.

Too bad that our last Fed Chairman was a dissembling, blithering idiot, a standing joke in his private practice, who could not find the optimal monetary policy with both hands. But he was a masterful politician and bureacrat, surrounded by fellow sycophants, and did know how to serve the banking interests and make himself look credible, at least to outsiders. And in retrospect, this paper asserts that in fact the Committee under Chairman Greenspan did make a mistake in easing too aggressively for too long a period in the early 2000's. (well, duh).

And too bad the Fed has a significant amount of influence and power, so that even academic economists are too cowed by fear and greed to have said much while Sir Alan and His Merry Pranksters blew serial bubbles in support of the new banking economy. Because if Her Majesty the Queen wishes to be truly illuminated, that is why most economists failed to see the Crash coming: you get what you pay for.

Like Elliot Waves, this Federal Reserve process and these tools 'look good' when applied to historic examples, but one wonders who could possible use it to predict anything and take action on that with any level of success. Has the US Fed really had any unqualified successes based on their own initiatives, other than when Volcker took the economy in hand and, applying a sufficient amount of will, personal resolve, and common sense, tamed the pernicious inflation of the 1970's? They appear to have created more problems than they have solved.

So what is the answer? To do nothing and let the markets play themselves out? That is folly as well, because for better or worse markets are highly subject to manipulation from a number of sources, and the distortions caused therein are potentially devastating, when one considers the willingness for example of the Asian states to manipulate their currencies in support of a mercantilist policy of importing jobs as a means of solving domestic social problems. Or the propensity of the Anglo-American establishment to perpetuate gross fraud as a means of ravaging foreign peoples that too trustingly adopted the globalist model of deregulated banking and modern derivative financing.

The answer of course is that only a significant systemic change can take us out of this cycle. It will have to be one that recognizes that globalism is not an a priori good in a world where nations and peoples wish to settle on their own way of life, and solution set to particular problems in ways that suit them.

We are probably nearing the end of a long cycle of economic deregulation and monetary mysticism, in which old barriers and protections and particularities were struck down, often with little or no serious thought to the policy implications and long term social practices. The zenith of this trend is the consideration of the IMF or some such body as the global Central Bank, with a council of global governors setting everything from trade rules to de facto living standards. One way to make the models work and end conflict among the nations is to make everyone a slave.

When the financial and social engineers fail, their natural response is to make excuses and seek more power. If the CPI is proving to be an impediment to our calculations, let's change how we measure it. If the measurement of inflation is now adjusted, but gold keeps signaling inflation, let's manage the price of gold. And if people keep making independent choices that are not consistent with the predictions of our model, let us manage their perception, influence their judgement, override their own experience and the advice of their parents, and persuade them to take on more debt than they can possibly ever repay, and still remain free.

Hopefully this trend will fall apart before the globalists can do any more damage in the real world, but if it does not and we do get a Council of Global Governors, remember that their oracle is likely to be in dodgy, over simplistic equations such as this, which will be used to throw some clothing around what is most likely to be an exercise in influence peddling, elitism, and raw, naked power of the few over the many.

"Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true."
Eric Hoffer

Was Monetary Policy Optimal During Past Deflation Scares?

Obama to Tell the G20 to Fix the US By Changing the World

When you can't run a state, run for President. When you can't run your country, attempt to run the world.

This directive to the G20 is probably going to make the Organizer-in-Chief's recent pathetic sermonette on altruism and self-denial to Wall Street seem effective by comparison.

Unless he is as prime an example of boobus Americanus as he appears to be by his actions, we suspect that this proposal is intended merely to be a blue sky diversion to a broadly unachievable goal from a genuine agenda for reform and action on the table including regulating bankers' pay, which might be an annoying hindrance to Obama's constituents on Wall Street. It has been estimated that the reforms on the table from Europe, for example, might cut the trading revenues at Goldman Sachs by a third.

What Obama does not say, and perhaps does not realize, is that the majority of the problems that exist in the US's imbalanced trade relationships is the position of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Owning the reserve currency is a significant benefit for your government and financial sectors, but it makes your manufacturing and productive economy the target of every mercantilist command economy around the globe that is by definition hungry for dollars.

Reuters
Obama wants G20 to rethink global economy
By Jeff Mason and Dave Graham
Mon Sep 21, 2009 12:29am EDT

WASHINGTON/BERLIN (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama said on Sunday he would push world leaders this week for a reshaping of the global economy in response to the deepest financial crisis in decades.

In Europe, officials kept up pressure for a deal to curb bankers' pay and bonuses at a two-day summit of leaders from the Group of 20 countries, which begins on Thursday.

The summit will be held in the former steelmaking center of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, marking the third time in less than a year that leaders of countries accounting for about 85 percent of the world economy will have met to coordinate their responses to the crisis.

The United States is proposing a broad new economic framework that it hopes the G20 will adopt, according to a letter by a top White House adviser.

Obama said the U.S. economy was recovering, even if unemployment remained high, and now was the time to rebalance the global economy after decades of U.S. over-consumption. (The recovery is as tenuous as Mr. Obama's prospects for a second term - Jesse)

"We can't go back to the era where the Chinese or the Germans or other countries just are selling everything to us, we're taking out a bunch of credit card debt or home equity loans, but we're not selling anything to them," Obama said in an interview with CNN television. (How about a system where Wall Street thinks it can defraud the world, and take usurious rents on every financial transaction in every market? - Jesse)

For years before the financial crisis erupted in 2007, economists had warned of the dangers of imbalances in the global economy -- namely huge trade surpluses and currency reserves built up by exporters like China, and similarly big deficits in the United States and other economies. (Greenspan dismissed every growing problem with an unswerving prevarication, and the corportocracy provided air support. - Jesse)

With U.S. consumers now holding back on spending after house prices plunged and as unemployment climbs, Washington wants other countries to become engines of growth. (Most of the world would like to cure its problems by net exporting to other countries in unbalanced trade relationships. The Asian preoccupation with mercantilism is in some ways the natural outcome of the US dollar reserve hegemony. There is a bit of a standoff here. - Jesse)

"That's part of what the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh is going to be about, making sure that there's a more balanced economy," Obama told CNN.

China has long been the target of calls from the West to get its massive population to spend more. It may be reluctant to offer a significant change in economic policy when Chinese President Hu Jintao meets Obama this week. (The only way they can spend more is if they get higher real wages, a neat trick when your national policy is based on exploiting the exploitation of your laboring class - Jesse)

The U.S. proposal, sketched out in a letter by Obama's top G20 adviser, Michael Froman, calls for a new "framework" to reflect the balancing process that the White House wants.

"The Framework would be a pledge on the part of G-20 leaders to individually and collectively pursue a set of policies which would lead to stronger, better-balanced growth," said the letter, which was obtained by Reuters. (Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya... Jesse)

Without naming specific countries, the proposal indicates the United States should save more and cut its budget deficit, China should rely less on exports and Europe should make structural changes -- possibly in areas such as labor law -- to make itself more attractive to investment.

To head off reluctance from China, Froman's letter also supported Beijing's call for developing countries to have more say at the International Monetary Fund. (Say = talk, but it does not imply that anyone will listen and take any action. The US owns the IMF. - Jesse)

The IMF would be at the center of a peer review process that would assess member nations' policies and how they affect economic growth...(Most statists are by nature Ponzi politicians who really cannot run anything complex, and have to keep expanding their power and span of control or collapse and be exposed as frauds. Its been a perennial source of mischief throughout history. - Jesse)

Europe to Push Broader Regulatory Agenda at G20

This is interesting because it tees up the European agenda ahead of the G20 meeting, and helps to highlight some points of contention between Europe and the Anglo-American financiers.

The IMF subject is a reflection of Europe's decentralized status. The ECB does not possess the broad powers of the Federal Reserve Bank, and there is a difference of opinion in Europe about its future role, and the centralization of power overall.

This is highly reminiscent of the US debate between the Federalists and the Jeffersonians.

MarketWatch
Europe supports broad financial regulation
By MarketWatch
12:42 p.m. EST Feb. 22, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- The European leaders of the Group of 20 called Sunday for more transparency and regulation of all financial markets, products and investors, including hedge funds, according to published reports.

Heads of state and finance ministers from France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic and Luxembourg met in Berlin to come up with a European position ahead of the G20 summit in London scheduled for April 2...

Leaders also reportedly proposed increasing to $500 billion the International Monetary Fund's financial resources for crisis management, in light of problems recapitalizing banks in Central and Eastern Europe. The IMF now has $250 billion in resources and already used $50 billion.

The call for increased IMF funding follows remarks from French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, who said Thursday that euro-zone countries should come to the aid of any troubled member-state and avoid IMF involvement, if a bailout becomes necessary....

Head of IMF Requires $1.2 Trillion for Global Bailouts and Stimulus

Recommendations and coordination are always accepted.

But its bad enough the Congress gave the Bush Administration $750 billlion to hand out to their favorite banks.

No way should the money be given to the IMF to actually distribute for fiscal stimulus. That is one step closer to world government.

Economic Times
IMF requires $1.2 trillion to boost world economy
18 Nov, 2008, 0139 hrs IST, AGENCIES

TRIPOLI: Up to two percent of the world's income, or 1.2 trillion dollars, should be spent on reviving the global economy, the head of the International Monetary Fund said in Tripoli on Monday.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the fund's managing director, called for "massive" and coordinated use of budgetary policy to overcome the crisis.

"It is time to use all instruments," he said at the opening of a conference on economic integration in the Maghreb region, urging a budgetary "push" of two percent of countries' gross domestic product.

On a world scale, this would add up to 1.2 trillion dollars.

"A coordinated budgetary policy sharply increases the effect of the policy," Strauss-Kahn said.

He indicated that he would favour a further interest rate cut by the European Central Bank.

IMF: Gold Leases, Loans, Swaps and the Gold Forward Rate

As you may recall we have a hypothesis that gold, the swiss franc, and the yen have all been helping to fuel the carry trade.

The yen has exploded higher, while the swiss franc has languished because of that country's heavy exposure to the financial system (16% of GDP) and the toxic debt problems throughout Europe.

As far as we know, gold does not have a similar issue with toxic bank debt, and from the numbers still looks to be heavily involved in carry trades based off leased central bank gold.

In reading this, it becomes clear that the IMF believes that once gold is lent out it becomes the property of the borrower who may in turn lend it out to third parties. What the lender holds is the 'promise' of the return of the gold at some future date.

What we find shocking however is that on the books there is no accounting for this potential liability. The gold that is lent out is still marked as 'gold reserves.'

What is the extent of this lending? How many ounces of central bank gold are really just paper promises for its return? If the dominos start falling in this carry trade it is very likely that there will be a declaration of force majeure, and the contracts will be settled in paper.

But it could be very embarrassing to the monetary authorities who have dealt away the possessions of their countries without inquiring about their ability to do so, or making their behind the scenes deals public. One way to settle this ahead of time is to promote 'gold sales' in which the paper settlement process is accelerated.

Watch this, because its sure to get interesting.

The Nature of Lease Payments on Gold Loans
BOPTEG ISSUES PAPER # 21A

IMF COMMITTEE ON BALANCE OF PAYMENTS STATISTICS
BALANCE OF PAYMENTS TECHNICAL EXPERT GROUP (BOPTEG)

Prepared by International and Financial Accounts Branch
Australian Bureau of Statistics
November 2004

Gold Loans

Gold loans or deposits are undertaken by monetary authorities to obtain a non-holding gain return on gold. The physical stock of gold is "lent to" or "deposited with" a financial institution (such as a bullion bank) or another party in the gold market (such as an intermediary for a gold dealer or gold miner with a temporary shortage of gold). In return, the borrower may provide the monetary authority with high quality collateral, but no cash, and will make a series of payments, known as lease payments.

The party who borrows the gold from a monetary authority may in turn "lend" the gold to a dealer or miner.

This ability to on-lend indicates that, while the package of transactions which makes up a gold loan is clearly very different from an outright sale of the gold, the rights and privileges associated with ownership of the gold have changed from the monetary authority to the borrower.

The loan or deposit may be placed on demand or for a fixed period. The amount of gold to be returned is based on the volume initially lent, regardless of any changes in the gold price.

The security and liquidity aspects of the monetary authority's gold loan claims on the depository corporations are regarded as a substitute for physical gold, such that the loan values are retained within the monetary authority's monetary gold reserves, leaving monetary gold stocks unchanged. If the loan is for a fixed period, it is usually available on short notice, to help meet the criteria for inclusion in reserve assets.

Gold loans or deposits share many of the characteristics of securities repurchase agreements (repos) and securities lending, the statistical treatment of which has proved intractable.

Gold Swaps

In order to analyse gold loans, it is useful to first understand gold swaps.

A gold swap involves an exchange of gold for foreign exchange deposits, with an agreement that the transaction be unwound at an agreed future date, at an agreed price. Gold swaps are usually undertaken between monetary authorities, although gold swaps sometimes involve transactions when one of the parties is not a monetary authority. In this case, the other party is usually a depository corporation. (A monetary authority is a central bank or Treasury. We wonder if J. P. Morgan is one of these swap parties since they are the major player int he global gold derivatives market - Jesse)

Gold swaps are undertaken when the cash-taking monetary authority has need of foreign
exchange but does not wish to sell outright its gold holdings. The monetary authority acquiring the foreign exchange pays an agreed rate, known as the gold forward rate. At maturity, the volume of gold returned is the same as that swapped, while the value of the foreign exchange - as determined at the time of initiation of the swap - is returned.

While, because of the limited number of players, gold swaps are unlikely to be tradable, they have all of the other characteristics of a financial derivative. The gold forward rate, which determines the payments associated with a gold swap, is set taking into account current and expected interest rates and gold prices. If gold swaps are considered financial derivatives, in statistical terms the payments associated with a gold swap are transactions in a financial derivative. Otherwise, the payments may be considered margin payments on a forward contract.

Components of a Gold Loan

A gold loan can be seen as a gold swap where the borrower of the gold provides no foreign exchange in exchange for the transfer of the gold. That is, a gold loan is a gold swap with an extra leg, whereby the gold lender lends the money received back to the gold borrower.

In order to gain an understanding of a gold loan, it is useful to separate it into three parts:

1. Change of Ownership of Gold - the monetary authority transfers the physical stock of gold to the borrower. The borrower can (and usually does) sell the gold to a third party.

2. Loan - as the borrower has ownership of the gold but has not paid for it, the monetary authority is deemed to have issued a loan to the borrower equal to the value of the gold. The borrower has a loan liability to the monetary authority. (Is the gold still reported in the lender's listed reserves? - Jesse)

3. Forward Contract - the borrower enters into a forward contract to deliver the original quantity of gold borrowed, to the monetary authority when the gold loan matures. At the maturity date, the monetary authority extinguishes the loan claim on the borrower in exchange for the receipt of the borrowed gold.

Analysing these components helps to understand the multiple positions and flows which are combined to make up a gold loan, and hence to understand the nature of the loan and the lease payments.

Lease Rates

In the case of a gold swap, the gold lender (cash taker) makes payments at an agreed rate, the gold forward rate, to the gold borrower.

If the above view of gold loans is correct, one component of the lease payments is the same payments as in a swap, but these are more than offset by interest on the loan going in the other direction, resulting in a net payment by the gold borrower to the gold lender (the opposite direction of the payment under a swap).

These payments are called gold lease payments and, according to the above view of gold loans, are made up of:

• interest on the loan, and
• transactions in a financial derivative or margin payments on a forward contract.

London Bullion Market Association Statistics

London Bullion Market Association Gold and Silver Fix and Forwards


To test the validity of this view, it is useful to look at how gold lease rates are determined in the market:

Gold lease rate = LIBOR - GOFO rate

LIBOR is the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate, a widely used international risk-free interest rate.

The GOFO rate is the Gold Forward Offered rate, which is the rate at which contributors (the market making members of the London Bullion Market Association) are prepared to swap gold against US dollars.

The charts below show the daily gold price and the daily one year LIBOR, GOFO, and gold lease rates over the past seven years.



The relationship of LIBOR and the GOFO rate to the lease rate is shown in Chart 2.
Comparing Chart 1 and Chart 2 shows that the gap between GOFO and LIBOR is significant in times of falling gold prices, and GOFO approaches LIBOR in times of rising gold prices.

The composition of the lease rate supports the view of the components of a gold loan outlined above. The payment of interest indicates the existence of a loan and the use of the GOFO rate indicates the existence of a gold swap.

Conclusion

The topic of this paper is the treatment of the lease payments on gold loans. The analysis of the positions and the flows has been done together as it is not possible to draw conclusions on the nature of the flows without looking at the positions to which they relate.

The description of components of a gold loan in this paper is likely to be controversial given the state of the overall debate on reverse transactions, but it is hopefully a useful contribution to that debate. The empirical support lent by the derivation of the lease rate, that is that the loan is seen by those setting the rate as a loan and a swap, may prove useful in that debate.

The conclusion on the nature of the lease payments is that they are the net of two flows, interest on a loan and transactions in a financial derivative or margin payments on a forward contract.

These should be recorded separately.

Hat tip to Steve Williams at CyclePro for bringing this paper to our attention.