A Run On the Central Bank of Belarus as Devaluation Fear Forces Halt to All Gold Sales

"Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked, ‘Account overdrawn.’

Ayn Rand

I was a little surprised the people fled to gold and tried to drain the central bank, desperately trying to get out of their fiat currency ahead of a suspected devaluation.

This is how it happens, on a smaller scale.

I was in Moscow in the 1990's when they were starting to flee the Russian rouble for gold, diamonds, US dollars, and vodka. It is hard to imagine what it feels like to watch your life savings simply and relentlessly evaporate away. It was a 'quiet panic' that left a very deep impression on me.

Apparently the US dollar is no longer so much a safe haven in that part of the world. At least that is what I hear.

Belarus is small. When a bigger ship starts to founder, the lifeboats may be very crowded.

It cannot happen.  The authorities will not allow it.  This is what they always say.

In some ways it is already happening.

The Feds are already rationing and throttling gold and silver sales by throwing paper and propaganda at the demand.

I wonder how much of it has been secretly siphoned away by insiders already. The time to buy income producing fixed assets is when there is 'blood flowing in the streets,' but the time to get safe and independently liquid is before that blood starts to flow.

Big things are happening, little brother.

Reuters
Belarus Central Bank Halts Sales of Gold for Roubles

MINSK, April 15 (Reuters) - Belarus' central bank has stopped selling gold to local retail customers for Belarussian roubles it said on Friday, after demand for precious metals soared due to expectations of a currency devaluation.

The bank did not explain its decision.

Belarus is in talks with Russia on a $3 billion bailout package that Minsk hopes will help it avoid a painful devaluation of the rouble and offset the large current account deficit.

Belarussians bought 470 kilograms of gold from the central bank last month, up from 209 kilograms in January and February together, as they sought to protect their savings.

Analysts say that Belarus will have to eventually devalue the rouble by about 20-30 percent even if it receives aid from Moscow. However, the central bank has said it would not make any such moves until late April.

The Marriage of Mercantilism and Corporatism: When Free Trade Is Not 'Free'

"The consequences of this policy are also stark and simple: in effect, China is taxing imports while subsidizing exports, feeding a huge trade surplus. You may see claims that China’s trade surplus has nothing to do with its currency policy; if so, that would be a first in world economic history. An undervalued currency always promotes trade surpluses, and China is no different." Paul Krugman

And he is exactly right. As regular readers know this matter of Chinese mercantilism and its toleration and acceptance by the West has been a key observation and objection here since 2000. Any economist who does not understand that devaluing and then maintaining an artificially low currency peg with a trading partner distorts the nature of that trade should review their knowledge of algebra.

Sophisticated oligarchs do not need to send real tanks against their people. They can accomplish the same objectives using fraud, debt, and corruption. Control the supply of money and care not who makes the laws. But it helps to have the lawmakers and regulators on the payroll.

It was in 1994 during the Clinton Administration that China was permitted to obtain full trading partner "Most Favored Nation" status, while vaguely promising to float their recently devalued currency some day, and address the human rights issues that were endogenous to their non-democratic, totalitarian government.

"From 1981 to 1993 there were six major devaluations in China. Their amounts ranged from 9.6 percent to 44.9 percent, and the official exchange rate went from 2.8 yuan per U.S. dollar to 5.32 yuan per U.S. dollar. On January 1, 1994, China unified the two-tier exchange rates by devaluing the official rate to the prevailing swap rate of 8.7 yuan per U.S. dollar." Sonia Wong, China's Export Growth

This served Mr. Clinton's constituents in Bentonville quite well, and has some interesting implications for the Chinese campaign contributions scandals. It supported the Rubin doctrine of a 'strong dollar' while facilitating the financialization of the US economy and the continuing decline of the middle class wage earners, under pressure to surrender a standard of living achieved at great cost. "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Currency Collapse." and China's Mercantilism: Selling Them the Rope

Not to limit this, George W. ratified the arrangement when he took office, and so it has gone on for almost fifteen years now, with China 'taxing imports while subsidizing exports' to the disadvantage of its western trading partners.

I expect certain economists who are serving their Chinese clients to make their case to muddy the waters, since this is what they are paid to do. But the silence of the many in this matter was so striking as to be incredible, almost mind boggling. But given the acquiescence of the many in the face of equally absurd theories such as the impossibility of a national housing bubble or pervasive market fraud in naturally efficient markets, we should not be surprised.

Even now someone as knowledgeable as Mr. Krugman can distinguish the inappropriateness of the Chinese unfair trade practice "in current environment" through currency manipulation with prior periods, as if it was all right back then, but somehow is no longer acceptable because of the current economic slump. How can one argue with a straight face that a currency peg that continues for years is not inherently unfair, and a contributing factor to economic imbalances, given the assumption that it imposes a de facto subsidy for exports and penalty for imports?

This is not a trivial distinction but tied to a generational assault on the US middle class. Class Warfare and the Decline of the West.

Perhaps it is a good time to reconsider the principle of the 'neutrality of money' with respect to exchange rates controls and global trade in a purely fiat reserve currency regime as was done with the 'efficient markets hypothesis.' Currency Manipulation and World Trade: A Caution. China is certainly standing western capitalism on its ear and giving it a spin. But this is not without historical precedent, and was predicted by V.I. Lenin himself. I would enjoy this spectacle perhaps if I were observing it from a distance in time.

In a global trade environment tied to external standards such as gold or silver, such egregious imbalances could not grow so large because the metals would impose a certain market discipline requiring a reconciliation and adjustment before monetary excesses became a potentially systemic catastrophe as pointed out so skillfully by Hugo Salinas-Price in Gold Standard: Protector and Generator of Jobs.

The policy errors of the Greenspan and Bernanke Fed, and the outrageously unrealistic if not romantic and utopian theories promulgated by economists about self-correcting markets make me, to borrow a phrase, want to 'bang my head against a wall.'

NYT
China, Japan, America
By Paul Krugman
September 12, 2010

Last week Japan’s minister of finance declared that he and his colleagues wanted a discussion with China about the latter’s purchases of Japanese bonds, to “examine its intention” — diplomat-speak for “Stop it right now.” The news made me want to bang my head against the wall in frustration.

You see, senior American policy figures have repeatedly balked at doing anything about Chinese currency manipulation, at least in part out of fear that the Chinese would stop buying our bonds. Yet in the current environment, Chinese purchases of our bonds don’t help us — they hurt us. The Japanese understand that. Why don’t we?

Some background: If discussion of Chinese currency policy seems confusing, it’s only because many people don’t want to face up to the stark, simple reality — namely, that China is deliberately keeping its currency artificially weak.

The consequences of this policy are also stark and simple: in effect, China is taxing imports while subsidizing exports, feeding a huge trade surplus. You may see claims that China’s trade surplus has nothing to do with its currency policy; if so, that would be a first in world economic history. An undervalued currency always promotes trade surpluses, and China is no different.

And in a depressed world economy, any country running an artificial trade surplus is depriving other nations of much-needed sales and jobs. Again, anyone who asserts otherwise is claiming that China is somehow exempt from the economic logic that has always applied to everyone else.

So what should we be doing? U.S. officials have tried to reason with their Chinese counterparts, arguing that a stronger currency would be in China’s own interest. They’re right about that: an undervalued currency promotes inflation, erodes the real wages of Chinese workers and squanders Chinese resources. But while currency manipulation is bad for China as a whole, it’s good for politically influential Chinese companies — many of them state-owned. And so the currency manipulation goes on.

Time and again, U.S. officials have announced progress on the currency issue; each time, it turns out that they’ve been had. Back in June, Timothy Geithner, the Treasury secretary, praised China’s announcement that it would move to a more flexible exchange rate. Since then, the renminbi has risen a grand total of 1, that’s right, 1 percent against the dollar — with much of the rise taking place in just the past few days, ahead of planned Congressional hearings on the currency issue. And since the dollar has fallen against other major currencies, China’s artificial cost advantage has actually increased.

Clearly, nothing will happen until or unless the United States shows that it’s willing to do what it normally does when another country subsidizes its exports: impose a temporary tariff that offsets the subsidy. So why has such action never been on the table?

One answer, as I’ve already suggested, is fear of what would happen if the Chinese stopped buying American bonds. But this fear is completely misplaced: in a world awash with excess savings, we don’t need China’s money — especially because the Federal Reserve could and should buy up any bonds the Chinese sell.

It’s true that the dollar would fall if China decided to dump some American holdings. But this would actually help the U.S. economy, making our exports more competitive. Ask the Japanese, who want China to stop buying their bonds because those purchases are driving up the yen. (Cui bono, Mr. Krugman, cui bono? - Jesse)

Aside from unjustified financial fears, there’s a more sinister cause of U.S. passivity: business fear of Chinese retaliation.

Consider a related issue: the clearly illegal subsidies China provides to its clean-energy industry. These subsidies should have led to a formal complaint from American businesses; in fact, the only organization willing to file a complaint was the steelworkers union. Why? As The Times reported, “multinational companies and trade associations in the clean energy business, as in many other industries, have been wary of filing trade cases, fearing Chinese officials’ reputation for retaliating against joint ventures in their country and potentially denying market access to any company that takes sides against China.”

Similar intimidation has surely helped discourage action on the currency front. So this is a good time to remember that what’s good for multinational companies is often bad for America, especially its workers.

So here’s the question: Will U.S. policy makers let themselves be spooked by financial phantoms and bullied by business intimidation? Will they continue to do nothing in the face of policies that benefit Chinese special interests at the expense of both Chinese and American workers? Or will they finally, finally act? Stay tuned

Morgan Stanley: Government Defaults Inevitable

In addition to "It's different this time" and "Self sufficiency is an out-moded concept" one of the deadliest assumptions is "That can never happen here."

Morgan Stanley says what we have all known for some time. There will be government defaults of various types on debts which have become unmanageable.

As we see in a UK Telegraph story today, a report claims the Tories are placing the greatest pain in managing their budget gaps on the backs of the less well to do, presumably protecting their more well to do constituency. No surprise to anyone if it is true. And yet this may not be enough unless the economy recovers and the great mass of the public can regain some reasonable level of organic economic activity.

In the States, the uber wealthy will be spending large sums to lobby against new taxes, and even removing tax cuts that were known to be untenable, and based on false economic assumptions, at the time they were passed under Bush. Instead they will point to more broadly public and regressive taxes such as VATs, and seek to curtail public programs like Medicare and Social Security, while leaving their own subsidies and welfare, such as those in the financial sector and corporate and dividend tax breaks, sacrosanct.

In the US the broad mass of consumer have been the economy's golden goose, and after decades of median wage stagnation, neo-liberal economic policies, and overseas military expansions and expeditions, that goose looks cooked.

But at the end of the day this soft class warfare, despite its vicious hypocrisy and pettiness, is all intramurals, as the real defaults and debt reconciliation will most likely be in the form of artificially low bond rates accompanied by devaluations in the Western fiat currencies. I have been trying to figure out a way that a selective default could be accomplished, but have not quite muddled through that yet.

The limit of the Fed's and Treasury's ability to monetize the debt, which is a form of default through a true monetary inflation, is the value of the dollar and the bond. People who have never lived through it will begin to finally understand this in the days to come.

Bloomberg
Morgan Stanley Says Government Defaults Inevitable
By Matthew Brown
Aug 25, 2010 11:44 AM ET

Investors will face defaults on government bonds given the burden of aging populations and the difficulty of securing more tax revenue, according to Morgan Stanley.

“Governments will impose a loss on some of their stakeholders,” Arnaud Mares, an executive director at Morgan Stanley in London, wrote in a research report today. “The question is not whether they will renege on their promises, but rather upon which of their promises they will renege, and what form this default will take.” The sovereign-debt crisis is global “and it is not over,” the report said.

Borrowing costs for so-called peripheral euro-region nations such as Greece and Ireland surged today, resuming their ascent on concern that governments won’t be able to narrow their budget deficits. Standard & Poor’s downgraded Ireland’s credit rating yesterday on concern about the rising costs to support nationalized banks.

Mares said debt as a percentage of gross domestic product is a false indicator of an economy’s health given it doesn’t reflect governments’ available revenue and is “backward- looking.” While the U.S. government’s debt is 53 percent of GDP, one of the lowest ratios among developed nations, its debt as a percentage of revenue is 358 percent, one of the highest, the report said. Conversely, Italy has one of the highest debt- to-GDP ratios, at 116 percent, yet has a debt-to-revenue ratio of 188, Mares said.

Double Dip

“Outright sovereign default in large advanced economies remains an extremely unlikely outcome, in our view,” the report said. “But current yields and break-even inflation rates provide very little protection against the credible threat of financial oppression in any form it might take.”

Mares once worked at the U.K.’s Debt Management Office and is a former senior vice-president at credit-rating company Moody’s Investors Service.

“Note that a double-dip recession would not invalidate this conclusion,” Mares’ report said. “It would cause yet further damage to the governments’ power to tax, pushing them further in negative equity and therefore increasing the risks that debt holders suffer a larger loss eventually.”

Investors’ concern that the U.S. may fall back into recession has grown in recent weeks as U.S. economic data missed economists’ estimates. A Citigroup Inc. index of U.S. economic data surprises fell to minus 59 last week, the least since January 2009...

“The conflict that opposes bondholders to other government stakeholders is more intense than ever, and their interests are no longer sufficiently well-aligned with those of influential political constituencies,” such as elderly voters and their claims on pensions and health insurance, Mares wrote.

Not So Much Deflation as the Decay of Value: SP 500 Futures and Gold Daily Charts Updated at Market Close

Wash and rinse. Best way to get that stubborn money out of the public through fees, commissions, and of course front running for those perfect trading profits at the faux banks.


Chart Updated at Market Close

Now that option expiration is over gold is back to where it was a week ago, trying to break out of its large cup and handle formation. Silver is on the cusp of activating a massive and bullish multi-year chart formation of its own. It is an open question whether gold or silver will lead the way.

But I have to say that the CFTC is a disgrace. Eventually they will clean up their markets, but the foot dragging and dissembling is a mark against them. Chairman Gary Gensler knows better, but he is a Goldman alumnus, so what else would we expect? There are always many frustrated people in every organization trying to do a good job, so we should not paint them all with the same brush. The boss sets the tone, and Gensler's tone seems to be the status quo and crony capitalism. But that is the overall flavor of the Obama economic team.


Chart Updated at Market Close

Most people have a profound misunderstanding about the function that gold, and to a somewhat lesser extent silver, perform in the currency markets and wealth preservation trade.

The meme is that gold is a hedge against inflation. Over the past 100 years or so in particular, the greatest threat to the US dollar, and indeed to most currencies, has been inflation, which is the debasement of the value of a currency through printing or expanding supply faster than real growth in productive economic activity.

But was it really inflation that drove the gold hedge, or something more properly called 'currency risk.' Inflation through expansion of supply is just one facet of currency risk.

The risk today is not a gradual inflation through an overexpansion of the broad money supply, but something insidiously different, not seen since the last Great Depression. It is the risk of the default and devaluation, and the erosion of the assets backing the currency itself, which is not yet showing up in the conventional inflation figures.

What backs the US currency? Often referred to simply as 'the full faith and credit of the government,' it is the ability to collect taxes and service the debt with real returns, and of course and importantly the Fed's and the Treasury's balance sheets. I should have to say no more about this to anyone who has been following recent developments. The erosion of the ability of the government to produce revenue by taxing real income, and the rapidly declining quality of the assets held by the Fed, are obvious. Yes the US dollar may look good when compared some of the other wretched alternatives, but that appearance is like the portrait of Dorian Gray, not capturing the rapid decline in its own worth and well being.

So perhaps this will prove to be some help to those who are expecting debt deterioration and monetary deflation to deliver to them a stronger dollar and stable wealth. They fail to notice that this did NOT happen in the 1930's, and in fact quite the opposite occurred. I am now *hoping* for stagflation as an outcome because it seems better than the alternatives where the US and Europe now appear to be heading.

Yes, it can do so in the short term, particularly if you own the world's reserve currency, and that largely an illusion. But the decay is there for any who care to see it, and the rush to gold by the smarter money is also there to see, for those who will not willfully blind themselves to it.

There is nothing more disheartening than to watch otherwise good people fighting the last war, or perhaps most properly the wrong war, painfully unaware that their tactics and assumptions are misconstrued and self-defeating, and that they are committed to following 'leaders' who are articulate, persuasive, often very loud, and wrong.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying And Love the Currency Collapse

The title is a reference to the culturally significant film, Dr. Strangelove, a satire on the fear of nuclear war that was so integral to the post war generation in the US.

If one reads this carefully, the BIS is really referencing a devaluation of about 22% which is hardly 'a collapse.' Here are some examples of post WW II currency collapses.

It depends on the timeframe, specifically the rate and extent with which the devaluation occurs. Also, it matters about what the devaluation has been against. Is it a relationship primarily to a reference point like the US dollar, largely affecting a narrow band of imports, or is it a true and general devaluation marked by soaring prices and monetary inflation domestically.

As I recall, China devalued the yuan by about 33% in the 1990's, and then pegged to the dollar, while 'persuading' first Bill Clinton (remember the Chinese campaign contributions scandal) and then George W. (whose family has a long history of supporting tyrannies for personal economic preferences) to allow them to maintain favored nation status, with the dispensation of 44% import tariffs, even while maintaining an artificially devalued currency, under full currency controls, and that fixed in a peg to the dollar.

"I am moving, therefore, to de-link human rights from the annual extension of Most Favored Nation trading status for China." --President Bill Clinton, announcing MFN status for China, White House, 5-26-94.

1994, Jan. 1 – China unifies its dual exchange rates by bringing the official and swap centre rates into line, officially devaluing the yuan by 33 percent overnight to 8.7 to the dollar as part of reforms to embrace a “socialist market economy”.

As you may recall, in 1994 Bill Clinton also pushed through the NAFTA agreement which, in his words, would 'level the playing field' for American, Canadian, and Mexican workers. Only a few really understood the inherent danger in leveling the field without a thorough integration. The current Greek dilemma is a good example of a halfway done scheme in which monetary policy does not match up well with fiscal policy and national temperament.

When one uses globalization of trade to 'knock down barriers,' among the barriers that are placed at risk are things like the Constitutional safeguards which a free people enjoy in their own domestic method of organization, such as healthcare, the right to organize, freedom from indentured servitude, child labor, individual rights, and so forth.

These are the very barriers against the tyranny and despotism of the few on which the country was founded in a dramatically historical rebellion of the common people against the injustice of autocrats and empires. This was the rationale for the great Wars. Well, the one world government types play the long game, and if at first you do not succeed...

So yes, in this case China was able to export their structural employment problems largely to the US, which gutted its manufacturing sector primarily for the benefit of the Banks, who were able to cash in on the 'strong dollar' and the decline of government protection for its citizens from criminal control fraud.

Personally I think that high tariffs on Chinese goods would work much better for the US than a general currency devaluation per se given its position as a net importer, The downside would be that in the short term there would be less of a market for the export driven debts incurred by supporting the development of a non-democratic country engaged in blatant currency manipulation and mercantilism.

But do not fear, enough palms have been crossed so that one would never expect a simple solution to occur. Political and financial fraud dwells in the realms of artificial complexity. And the competitive but managed devaluations of currencies will serve to transfer more wealth from the many to the few quite well, a sort of hidden tax on the mob, while the wealthy continue to benefit.

But then again, the BIS may just be priming us for a crisis to come, which is consistent with the steady but quiet migration into gold by the wealthy, despite the propaganda they might put out for the masses to hear. As Pliny the Elder observed, "Ruinis inminentibus musculi praemigrant:" When collapse is imminent, the little rodents flee.

As an aside, here is a fairly good example of a man's thinking. Notice how Keynes changed his views of globalization from the euphoria of the British empire expressed the famous passage in "The Economic Consequences of the Peace" in 1920 which sounds like an Ode to the British Empire:

"What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man that age was which came to an end in August, 1914! The greater part of the population, it is true, worked hard and lived at a low standard of comfort, yet were, to all appearances, reasonably contented with this lot. But escape was possible, for any man of capacity or character at all exceeding the average, into the middle and upper classes, for whom life offered, at a low cost and with the least trouble, conveniences, comforts, and amenities beyond the compass of the richest and most powerful monarchs of other ages. The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various products of the whole earth, in such quantity as he might see fit, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep; he could at the same moment and by the same means adventure his wealth in the natural resources and new enterprises of any quarter of the world, and share, without exertion or even trouble, in their prospective fruits and advantages; or he could decide to couple the security of his fortunes with the good faith of the townspeople of any substantial municipality in any continent that fancy or information might recommend. He could secure forthwith, if he wished it, cheap and comfortable means of transit to any country or climate without passport or other formality, could despatch his servant to the neighboring office of a bank for such supply of the precious metals as might seem convenient, and could then proceed abroad to foreign quarters, without knowledge of their religion, language, or customs, bearing coined wealth upon his person, and would consider himself greatly aggrieved and much surprised at the least interference. But, most important of all, he regarded this state of affairs as normal, certain, and permanent, except in the direction of further improvement, and any deviation from it as aberrant, scandalous, and avoidable. The projects and politics of militarism and imperialism, of racial and cultural rivalries, of monopolies, restrictions, and exclusion, which were to play the serpent to this paradise, were little more than the amusements of his daily newspaper, and appeared to exercise almost no influence at all on the ordinary course of social and economic life, the internationalization of which was nearly complete in practice."

After a period of years we can see his shift in thinking, albeit reluctantly and with many caveats, towards practical National Self-sufficiency in 1933.

"I was brought up, like most Englishmen, to respect free trade not only as an economic doctrine which a rational and instructed person could not doubt, but almost as a part of the moral law. I regarded ordinary departures from it as being at the same time an imbecility and an outrage. I thought England's unshakable free trade convictions, maintained for nearly a hundred years, to be both the explanation before man and the justification before Heaven of her economic supremacy. As lately as 1923 I was writing that free trade was based on fundamental "truths" which, stated with their due qualifications, no one can dispute who is capable of understanding the meaning of the words...It is a long business to shuffle out of the mental habits of the prewar nineteenth-century world. It is astonishing what a bundle of obsolete habiliments one's mind drags round even after the centre of consciousness has been shifted. But to-day at last, one-third of the way through the twentieth century, we are most of us escaping from the nineteenth; and by the time we reach its mid point, it may be that our habits of mind and what we care about will be as different from nineteenth-century methods and values as each other century's has been from its predecessor's...For these strong reasons, therefore, I am inclined to the belief that, after the transition is accomplished, a greater measure of national self-sufficiency and economic isolation among countries than existed in 1914 may tend to serve the cause of peace, rather than otherwise. At any rate, the age of economic internationalism was not particularly successful in avoiding war; and if its friends retort, that the imperfection of its success never gave it a fair chance, it is reasonable to point out that a greater success is scarcely probable in the coming years...I sympathize, therefore, with those who would minimize, rather than with those who would maximize, economic entanglement among nations. Ideas, knowledge, science, hospitality, travel--these are the things which should of their nature be international. But let goods be homespun whenever it is reasonably and conveniently possible, and, above all, let finance be primarily national. Yet, at the same time, those who seek to disembarrass a country of its entanglements should be very slow and wary. It should not be a matter of tearing up roots but of slowly training a plant to grow in a different direction."

I wonder if he lived today Keyens would agree that globalization leads inevitably towards restraints among nations, and a bias towards one world government. I think he would, and he would not be favorable towards it. Make no mistake, some view this favorably as the final solution to managing the unruly masses, and preventing the wastefulness of war and sub-optimization of individual choice by those who they consider and portray as unfit to rule themselves. The shift in Keynes thought is unmistakable, and I admire the self-knowledge he portrays in analyzing, examining, and understanding his own prejudices. It takes a great mind to rise above oneself and their own age.

Quite frankly I do not expect the Fed and Treasury to ever let go willingly of the reins of the economy, or reigns of power if you will, through their aggressive financial engineering in partnership with the Banks. A return to normal will not be achieved without a significant amount of effort, conflict and most likely, pain. It appears to be unavoidable now. As you may recall, Dr. Strangelove was insane, and his dark vision affected the politicians around him. One has to wonder if Barack, Ben, Tim and Larry have their reservations made for a place in the mineshafts.

The customary price of freedom will be paid, as always. The light of freedom may be extinguished for a time, but like a spark that is cherished in thoughts and hearts of the true, will remain to be revived again on some future day.

Bloomberg
Currency Collapse May Stimulate Economic Expansion, BIS Says
By Matthew Brown

June 14 (Bloomberg) -- Currency collapses tend to spur a resumption of economic growth rather than fueling a decline in gross domestic product, according to the Bank for International Settlements.

Currency collapses are associated with permanent output losses of about 6 percent of GDP, on average, though the drop tends to appear beforehand, the Basel, Switzerland-based BIS said in its quarterly review yesterday.

“This suggests that it may not be the currency collapse that reduces output, but rather the factors that led to the depreciation,” Camilo E. Tovar wrote in the study. “To gain a full understanding of the implications of currency collapses on economic activity it is important to carefully examine the full circle of events surrounding the episode.” (How about the utter destruction of savings and the impoverishment of millions? That has a dampening effect as I recall from the stories that my grandparents told. - Jesse)

The positive effects of a weaker currency on GDP, including making local products cheaper than imported goods, may outweigh the negative ones, such as rising inflation. Currency collapses occur when the annual exchange rate drops by about 22 percent, according to the BIS, which identified 79 such episodes, “more commonly in Africa than in Asia or Latin America,” since 1960, Tovar said.

“They also occurred under all types of currency regimes, except possible floating-exchange-rate regimes, where there are simply too few observations to obtain meaningful estimates,” the BIS said.

Economic Contraction

The euro tumbled about 20 percent against the dollar between Nov. 25, 2009, and last week as investor concern over record budget deficits in countries including Greece spurred speculation the 16-nation currency union may split. The European Union in May crafted a 750 billion-euro ($908 billion) rescue package to stem the crisis.

Greece’s economy will contract 3.9 percent this year and 1.2 percent in 2011, after shrinking 2 percent in 2009, according to the median of eight economist estimates compiled by Bloomberg. The euro-region will expand by 1.1 percent this year and 1.5 percent in 2011, after falling 4.1 percent last year, median forecasts show.

Hans-Werner Sinn, president of Germany’s Ifo economic institute, said on June 3 that it would be best for Greece to leave the euro instead of implementing an austerity program to reduce its deficit. Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou pledged budget cuts worth almost 14 percent of GDP to bring the deficit within the EU limit of 3 percent by the end of 2014.

“The real solution for Greece would be to leave the euro followed by a depreciation” of the new currency, Sinn said in an interview at a conference in Interlaken, Switzerland.

Growth May ‘Dominate’

European Central Bank Executive Board member Lorenzo Bini Smaghi said on May 28 that there are “no alternatives” for Greece beyond following the austerity program.

“Before drawing policy conclusions we should emphasise that these results are subject to a number of caveats,” the BIS said in the report. “Most importantly, the analysis does not address the reasons why currency collapses occur in the first place. Our analysis also has little to say about the mechanisms involved after the currency collapse takes place. While we cannot disentangle the various factors, our results do suggest that expansionary mechanisms tend to dominate.”

Why the Federal Government Seized the Monetary Gold in 1933

The question of confication reappears every time gold rallies, from those with enough history to be able to throw out a few facts and sound plausible, but not enough grounding in history and the law to actually place them in any sort of reasonable context.

Below is a 'reprise' of a blog entry we posted early this year on the topic.

The Feds acted on gold because at the time it WAS the currency of the country, and the government had some proper claims on it. When the US left the gold standard it relinquished all such claims, as gold became purely private property. Except perhaps if you are holding gold American eagles, which bear the patina of 'currency.'

It should also be noted that the sole action of the government was to ask for the gold, to withdraw convertibility of gold notes from the domestic public, and to monitor the activity of safe deposit boxes taking certain categories of gold, and essentially nothing else. There were no investigations, searches, or even active prosecutions for non-compliance.

The purpose of the confiscation was to prepare the way for a formal devaluation of the dollar while it was still on the gold standard.

Could the government try to confiscate the gold from private citizens again? Certainly. Although unless it is part of a return to the gold standard with adequate recompense, it would be little more than the theft of private property.

The government can also ask you to place an RFID chip in your head before you can buy anything or drive a car, ask for your children and place them in youth camps, bind you over to your creditors in indentured servitude, ask you to house homeland security troops in your home with no payment, and request your presence on a freight train for relocation to New Mexico.

There is a wide difference between what *could* be done, what is likely to be done, and what people might consider to be unreasonable enough to resist.

Talk of confiscation invariably occurs when gold rallies because it is a way for those who rode the rally to climb the wall of worry and those who missed the rally to feel better about their lost opportunity.


The Last Time the Feds Devalued the Dollar to Save the Banks
14 January 2009

We dipped once again into the Federal Reserve Bulletin Publication from June, 1934 to take a closer look at the growth of the monetary base, and found an interesting graphic that shows the accounting for the January 1934 devaluation of the dollar and the subsequent result on Bank Reserves in the Federal Reserve System.

As you will recall, the Gold Act, or more properly Executive Order 6102 of April 5, 1933, required Americans to surrender their gold coinage and certificates to the Federal Reserve Banks by May 1, 1933. There were no prosecutions for non-compliance except one benchmark case which was brought voluntarily by a person who wished to challenge the act in court.

After a substantial portion of the gold was turned in by US citizens and taken from their bank based safe deposit boxes, the government officially devalued the dollar from 20.67 to 35.00 per ounce in the Gold Reserve Act of January 31, 1934.

The proceeds from this devaluation were used to provide a significant boost to the Federal Reserve member bank positions as shown in the first chart below.

The inflation visited on the American people because of this action helped to take the CPI as it was then measured up 1200 basis points from about -8% to +4% by the end of 1933. To somewhat offset the monetary inflation the Fed also contracted the Monetary Base which served the nascent recovery in the real economy rather poorly and is viewed widely as one of a series of policy errors.

Considering that the actions did little for the employment situation this was painful medicine indeed to those who were dependent on wages.



Fortunately at the same time FDR was initiating the New Deal programs which, despite continual opposition from a Republican minority in Congress, managed to provide a small measure of relief for the 20+% public that was suffering from unemployment and wage stagnation.

People ask frequently "Will the government seize gold again?"

While there is no certainty involved in anything if a government begins to overturn the law and seize private property, one has to ask for the context and details first to understand what happened and why, to understand the precedent.

Technically, the government did not engage in a pure seize of private property, since at that time the US was on the gold standard, and much of the gold holdings of US citizens were in the form of gold coinage and certificates.

Governments always make the case that the currency is their property and that the user is merely holding it as a medium of exchange. The foundation of the argument was that the government required to recall its gold to strengthen the backing of the US dollar against the net outflows of gold for international trade. The devaluation helped with this as well, since dollars brought less gold for trade balances.

People also ask, "Why didn't the government just revalue the dollar without trying to recall all the gold from the American public?"

The answer would seem to be that this would have been more just, more equitable recompense for the public. The Treasury could have purchased gold from the public to support its foreign trade needs.

But it would have left much less liquidity for the banks.

One can make a better case that the recall of the gold, with the subsequent revaluation to benefit a small segment of the population in the Banks, was a form of seizure of wealth without due compensation. Hence the lack of active prosecutions.

So, will the government take back gold again to save the banks by devaluing the dollar?

Highly unlikely, because they not only do not need to this, since the dollar is no longer backed by gold, and is a form of secular property except perhaps for gold eagles, but they do not have to, because they are devaluing the dollar already to save the banks.

This time the confiscation of wealth to save the banks is called TARP.

If one thinks about it, US Dollars are being created and provided directly to the banks to boost their free reserves significantly, at a scale comparable and beyond to 1933-34.

The confiscation of wealth is being spread among all holders of US dollars and dollar assets, foreign and domestic, in the more subtle form of monetary inflation.

Granted, the government must be more opaque to mask their actions in order to sustain confidence in the dollar while the devaluation occurs, but this is exactly what is happening, and all that is required to happen in a fiat regime.

There is no need to seize widely held exogenous commodities like gold and oil, but merely dampen any bellwether signals that a significant devaluation of the dollar is once gain being perpetrated on the American people in order to save the banks.

Its fascinating to look carefully at this next chart below.



First, notice the big drop in gold in circulation of 9.8 million ounces, or roughly 36% of the measured inventory at the end of 1932. Think someone was front-running the dollar devaluation? We suspect that the order went out to start pulling in the gold stock to the banks.

The reduction in gold in circulation AFTER the announcement of the Gold Act in April would be about 3.9 million ounces, or roughly 22% of the gold remaining in circulation in March 1933.

Considering that all gold coinage held by banks in the vaults was automatically seized, the voluntary compliance rate is not all that impressive. We are not sure how much of this was being held in overseas hands by non-US entities.

But beyond a doubt, there was a unjust, if not illegal, seizure of wealth by requiring citizen to turn in their gold to the banks, which was then revalued at the beginning of 1934 by 69% from 20.67 to 35 dollars.

It would have been much more equitable to devalue the dollar and to change the basis for dollar/gold first, before requiring private citizens to surrender their holdings. But of course, this would have lessened the liquidity available for direct infusion into the Federal Reserve banks.

Gold Rises to Record Prices Against European and Asian Currencies

The current global crisis is a direct result of the long Greenspan chairmanship of the Fed, neo-liberal deregulation of the financial markets, and rampant fraud and corruption amongst the financiers controlling the world's reserve currency, from the bankers to the ratings agencies to the regulatory bodies.

"Those entrapped by the herd instinct are drowned in the deluges of history. But there are always the few who observe, reason, and take precautions, and thus escape the flood. For these few gold has been the asset of last resort." Antony C. Sutton

UK Telegraph
Gold hits record against euro on fear of Zimbabwean-style response to bank crisis
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
8:49PM GMT 17 Feb 2009

This gold rally is driven by safe-haven fears and has a very different feel from the bull market we've had for the last eight years," said John Reade, chief metals strategist at UBS. "Investors are seeing articles in the press saying governments should deliberately stoke inflation, and they are reacting to it."

Gold jumped to multiple records on Tuesday, triggered by fears that East Europe's banking crisis could set off debt defaults and lead to contagion within the eurozone. It touched €762 an ounce against the euro, £675 against sterling, and 47,783 against India's rupee.

Jewellery demand – usually the mainstay of the industry – has almost entirely dried up and the price is now being driven by investors. They range from the billionaires stashing boxes of krugerrands under the floors of their Swiss chalets (as an emergency fund for total disorder) to the small savers buying the exchange traded funds (ETFs). SPDR Gold Trust has added 200 metric tonnes in the last six weeks. ETF Securities added 62,000 ounces last week alone.

In dollar terms, gold is at a seven-month high of $964. This is below last spring's peak of $1,030 but the circumstances today are radically different. The dollar itself has become a safe haven as the crisis goes from bad to worse – if only because it is the currency of a unified and powerful nation with institutions that have been tested over time. It is not yet clear how well the eurozone's 16-strong bloc of disparate states will respond to extreme stress. The euro dived two cents to $1.26 against the dollar, threatening to break below a 24-year upward trend line.

Crucially, gold has decoupled from oil and base metals, finding once again its ancient role as a store of wealth in dangerous times.

"People can see that the only solution to the credit crisis is to devalue all fiat currencies," said Peter Hambro, chairman of the Anglo-Russian mining group Peter Hambro Gold. "The job of central bankers is to allow this to happen in an orderly fashion through inflation. I'm afraid it is the only way to avoid disaster, but naturally investors are turning to gold as a form of wealth insurance."

One analyst said the spectacle of central banks slashing rates to zero across the world and buying government debt as if there was no tomorrow feels like the "beginning of the 'Zimbabwe-isation' of the global economy".

Gold bugs have been emboldened by news that Russia has accumulated 90 tonnes over the last 15 months.

"We are buying gold," said Alexei Ulyukayev, deputy head of Russia's central bank. The bank is under orders from the Kremlin to raise the gold share of foreign reserves to 10pc.

The trend by central banks and global wealth funds to shift reserves into euro bonds may have peaked as it becomes clear that the European region is tipping into a slump that is as deep – if not deeper – than the US downturn. Germany contracted at an 8.4pc annual rate in the fourth quarter. The severity of the crash in Britain, Ireland, Spain, the Baltics, Hungary, Ukraine and Russia has shifted the epicentre of this crisis across the Atlantic. The latest shock news is the 20pc fall in Russia's industrial production in January. The country is losing half a million jobs a month.

Markets have been rattled this week by warnings from rating agency Moody's that Austrian, Swedish and Italian banks may face downgrades over their heavy exposure to the ex-Soviet bloc. The region has borrowed $1.7 trillion (£1.2 trillion) – mostly from European banks – and must roll over $400bn this year....

Willem Buiter Warns of a US Dollar Collapse While China Makes a Move

This UK Telegraph story below is a bit florid in its reporting based on selective quotations from an otherwise phlegmatic column by the Maverecon, Willem Buiter in the Financial Times titled Can the US Economy Afford a Keynesian Stimulus?

Its an interesting essay, and it is hard to argue with his thesis, since it has been the recurrent theme of this blogwriter since 2000. He is directionally correct.

But M. Buiter seems to miss the key placement of pieces in this stage of the game, seeing only one aspect of the play. He sees the weakness of the US, and the corruption and mismanagement of the US financial system, which, somewhat ironically, describes that of Europe as well (and Russia and China). The European banking system has been a house of cards for some time.

He believes that the rest of the world will shun US financial investments based on the broken myth of US financial efficiency. It was an illusion, and it has been dispelled. And we do not think that it was ever really the linchpin of the dollar hegemony.

Many private parties have already fled US financial investments, and in turn a great deal of money has come back to the US from the developing nations. So here we are.

The question is not whether the US can afford a Keynesian stimulus package.

The real question can the rest of the world afford a US Keynesian stimulus package? And if not, what will the world do about replacing the US dollar as the world's reserve currency and the basis for most international trade?

More specifically, how will China, Japan and Saudi Arabia migrate to an industrial policy that is independent of the need to export goods to the United States while maintaining low wages and domestic consumption, and relatively low defense spending?

China, not depending on the US military as a shield, will likely make the first moves, as they are reported to be making tentative steps in this direction, as in this overstated report from AsiaNews.it Chinese Yuan Set to Replace US Dollar. The odds are high that China will play into a US geopolieconomic strategy by attempting to do the obvious, in an obvious way.

This is not to say that there will be no change, ever. There will, since the dollar has not always been the faux gold standard, and will not always be.

But there is a decided lack of original thinking on the matter, and a definite lack of will to do much about it, in the rest of the world.

So until then, it is status quo, and the US can afford anything it wishes. Because it can, and it will.
That is the current position of the pieces on the board.


UK Telegraph
Willem Buiter warns of massive dollar collapse
By Edmund Conway, Economics Editor
05 Jan 2009

Americans must prepare themselves for a massive collapse in the dollar as investors around the world dump their US assets, a former Bank of England policymaker has warned.

The long-held assumption that US assets - particularly government bonds - are a safe haven will soon be overturned as investors lose their patience with the world's biggest economy, according to Willem Buiter.

Professor Buiter, a former Monetary Policy Committee member who is now at the London School of Economics, said this increasing disenchantment would result in an exodus of foreign cash from the US.

The warning comes despite the dollar having strengthened significantly against other major currencies, including sterling and the euro, after hitting historic lows last year. It will reignite fears about the currency's prospects, as well as sparking fears about the sustainability of President-Elect Barack Obama's mooted plans for a Keynesian-style increase in public spending to pull the US out of recession.

Writing on his blog, Prof Buiter said: "There will, before long (my best guess is between two and five years from now) be a global dumping of US dollar assets, including US government assets. Old habits die hard. The US dollar and US Treasury bills and bonds are still viewed as a safe haven by many. But learning takes place."

He said that the dollar had been kept elevated in recent years by what some called "dark matter" or "American alpha" - an assumption that the US could earn more on its overseas investments than foreign investors could make on their American assets. However, this notion had been gradually dismantled in recent years, before being dealt a fatal blow by the current financial crisis, he said.

"The past eight years of imperial overstretch, hubris and domestic and international abuse of power on the part of the Bush administration has left the US materially weakened financially, economically, politically and morally," he said. "Even the most hard-nosed, Guantanamo Bay-indifferent potential foreign investor in the US must recognise that its financial system has collapsed."

He said investors would, rightly, suspect that the US would have to generate major inflation to whittle away its debt and this dollar collapse means that the US has less leeway for major spending plans than politicians realise.

Moscow Memories of 1997

The last trip I had to Moscow was in the spring of 1997 as the ruble crisis was getting seriously underway towards the Russian debt default in August 1998.

US dollars were king, and you could buy almost anything except diamonds and gold with them as the public was beginning to panic out of the ruble and even basic commodities were in incredibly short supply. Our driver would take the windshield wipers off his car at night so that they would not be stolen.

The black market was alive and well. The city had the flavor of the Wild West as the Russkaya Mafiya was out in force in trademark long black woolen overcoats. A shipment of the coats had arrived the previous year at a local flea market and were impressively sinister, amenable to concealment, yet effective against the cold, thereby creating the signature gangsta look.

On that trip I had a driver/bodyguard, and an interpreter as I had no Russian, just a smattering of loosely related slavic languages from childhood. The Japanese immersion course just completed in Princeton for another long term project was not particularly useful. French was in slight demand, but it might have been more useful in Leningrad. I was able to read some instruction for a video camera that used SECAM, but that was about it.

The interpreter was a lady who mildly resembled Tatiana Romanova in From Russia with Love, but with the disposition of Odd Job. She was serious and highly professional, but did have a weakness for Dunhill cigarettes and the curious two tone bloody Mary's they serve there. Her boss was an Italian ex-pat who was a real character.

One should always treat the local associates well and with respect, because not only will they keep you out of trouble, but they will often slip you a bit of valuable information, even during an active translation. They take pride in their work, and are not servants. It is not only a matter of good manners but also good business sense. The way in which the average American businessman behaves is too often clumsily embarrassing, vacillating between boorish and aloof.

We switched hotels at the last minute as there was an unscheduled execution in the lobby of our intended lodgings the week before our arrival. The hotel we did have was nice, foreign owned out of Belgium as I recall, but the staff was a bit stiff if you know what I mean. It was more like a minimum security prison than a hotel. I'm sure our drivers and guards were getting kickbacks. Everyone was getting paid one way or the other.

That last trip was the culmination of a series of business trips in which we were opening up higher speed data and video communications to Moscow from the domestic US via reliable non-satellite connections. Keeping a lock on Sputnik from the US was a challenge given the inclination and its tendency to wobble somewhat erratically.

The 'last mile' in Moscow was a challenge given Moscow Telephone's tradition of non-attention to quality planning and somewhat eccentric layout of their central offices, as in the basement of an old house with a propensity for periodic flooding, generally during key events for ABC News or the State Department.

It may sound like a serious problem, but my team tended to take this sort of thing in stride, since it was a walk in the park, relatively speaking, compared to dropping satellite dishes into a simmering theater of war which we had often done before.

We teamed with another company named Sovintel instead, and chose to go with direct microwave shots from their tower to the multinational business and government locations who were the prime customers as they were the only ones who could still pay for premium services.

I liked Moscow and the people in particular. A walk in Red Square on a crisp night with falling snow, with St. Basil's ahead and GUM department store lit up on the left is very picturesqe. The Kremlin looks like the entrance to the kingdom of Mordor.

The Red Army guards were young and annoying, probably cranky because they were not getting paid. I remember walking through Lenin's tomb, which was utterly deserted, and being yelled at constantly to 'move along' by a young Russian soldier who looked like he had an urge to plant his jackboot on my face.

Ex-patriates in Moscow had an interesting time, living in $5000 per month apartments that were more indicative of their non-resident status than the amenities of their accommodations. We visited an apartment in one of the seven "Woolworth buildings" from the Stalin era that had a door which would have served for a very secure bank vault.

The ex-pats telex messages to us in the planning phase were concise: "Bring Western toilet paper." They tended to meet us every morning at the hotel, to take the toilet paper and soap out of our rooms and eat with us as our guests at the hotel breakfast buffet. It was a nice spread, and offered a more extensive fare than the grocery store we visited which offered only cabbages and big garishly orange boxes of Uncle Ben's rice.

We attended a performance at the Bolshoi Theater sponsored by some multinationals. Most notably, as a friend so slyly put it, the expats may be living poorly but it was nice to see them bring their attractive young daughters to the event. I don't think any of them were married, and we came away with the impression that people took assignments there to escape bad debts or bad marriages in the West.

There were a remarkable series of conversations with an interesting local acquaintances including one I called "Casper the Ghost," because of the promotional movie cap he always wore. From the way he spoke I became convinced that the primary occupation of those with savings was to convert it into hard currencies, gold and diamonds, and if possible get it out of the country.

Casper was busy amassing enough gold, while facilitating the efforts of others, in order to get out of Russia and move to the western US. He cynically wore the mafia signature black coat to scare off small time competition. "I go to same flea market and buy. Its no hard to do." He was a good source of information for a few drinks and the promise of a contact in Colorado. I think his real name was "Ben." That is how he answered the phone when I called him back from the States.

That, and multinationals with a local presence like McDonalds trying to figure out ways to work around currency controls or do something productive with their profits. I had the chance to visit the largest McDonald's in the world at that time, at the request again of the expats, and it was indeed impressive with 32 checkouts, but no customers.

They were desperate times, and you could see that there was a climactic crisis coming. It is easy to talk about this sort of thing, a thousand to one devaluation of your home currency, but harder to understand the impact. Imagine that you have $500,000 in savings for your retirement. Now imagine that within two years it is effectively reduced to $500 or less, and you will understand how disconcerting a currency crisis can be.

If you don't think a financial panic is possible here in the US, just take a look at the negative returns on short term T bills, and you will get a taste of the leading edge.

One of the best descriptions of the Weimar experience I have ever read was by Adam Fergusson titled "When Money Dies: The Nightmare of the Weimar Collapse." It is notoriously difficult to obtain, but it does the best job in describing how a currency collapse can come on like a lightning strike, although in retrospect everyone could have seen it coming. Denial is a strong narcotic. People believe in their institutions and ignore history until they are staring off the edge of the abyss.

But in Moscow as in everywhere life does go on. I left with pocketfuls of 1000 ruble notes which I *bought* along with the requisite matroyshka dolls and military medals, all for the kids to play with. Things became worse, much worse, and then eventually they became better.

I have often wondered if 'Casper' ever achieved his dream of taking his diamonds and gold and relocating to Colorado. I hope he did. If he is there, I wonder if he is thinking of moving again.

Bloomberg
Russians Buy Jewelry, Hoard Dollars as Ruble Plunges
By Emma O’Brien and William Mauldin

Dec. 11 (Bloomberg) -- ...Russians are shifting their cash into foreign currencies and buying things they don’t need as the economy stalls and the central bank weakens its defense of the ruble, signaling a larger devaluation may be on the way. The currency has fallen 16 percent against the dollar since August, when Russia’s invasion of neighboring Georgia helped spur investors to pull almost $200 billion out of the country, according to BNP Paribas SA.

The central bank today expanded the ruble’s trading band against a basket of dollars and euros, allowing it to drop 0.8 percent, said a spokesman who declined to be identified on bank policy.

With the specter of the 1998 debt default and devaluation in mind, Russians withdrew 355 billion rubles ($13 billion), or 6 percent of all savings, from their accounts in October, the most since the central bank started posting the data two years ago. Foreign-currency deposits rose 11 percent.

Oligarchs Pinched

Those withdrawals are increasing pressure for the ruble’s devaluation, according to Basil Issa, an emerging- markets analyst at BNP Paribas in London.

Property is now a protective investment, not just a status symbol, said Sergei Polonsky, founder of real estate developer Mirax Group, which is building Moscow’s tallest skyscraper.

“Lately our clients are mostly those who buy real estate not to live in but to secure their investments,” Polonsky said. “No one wants to be left with pieces of paper.”

The 25 wealthiest Russians on Forbes magazine’s list of billionaires, including Oleg Deripaska and Roman Abramovich, lost a combined $230 billion from May to October as asset values plummeted, according to Bloomberg calculations.

‘Feel Happy’

For the burgeoning middle class, investments of choice range from electronics to gold jewelry. Evroset, Russia’s largest mobile-phone chain, is telling people to buy anything they can.

“It’s better to feel happy that you own something than to fear losing the money you have earned,” Chairman Yevgeny Chichvarkin says in a letter posted at 5,200 Evroset stores. “If you need a car, buy a car! If you need an apartment, buy an apartment! If you need a fur coat, buy a fur coat!”

Sales at Technosila, the third-biggest consumer electronics chain, have doubled since September as customers rush to swap rubles for flat-screen TVs and laptops, spokeswoman Nadezhda Senyuk said by phone from Moscow, where the company is based.

Jewelry sales are also accelerating, particularly items made of gold and diamonds, said Vladimir Stankevich, advertising director at Adamas, Russia’s third-largest jewelry retailer.

“More cash appeared on the market and there’s an opinion among shoppers that gold is a good investment in times of crisis,” Stankevich said.

Natalya Kulikova has a different approach. The 31-year-old sales manager said she’s opened accounts in rubles, euros and dollars at three different banks -- one foreign and two domestic -- to guard her savings.

“My main goal is to save money,” she said.

Putin Pledge

Those who don’t want to spend are keeping more money at home or in safe-deposit boxes because the government guarantee on bank accounts is limited to 700,000 rubles, said Yulia Tsepliaeva, chief economist in Moscow at Merrill Lynch & Co.

Alfa Bank, Russia’s biggest non-state lender, said demand for boxes has increased about 40 percent since October, and there are few available.

“The Russian experience with saving is not that good and people prefer to consume and enjoy rather than save in pre-crisis situations,” Tsepliaeva said. “Buy cash dollars and put them in mattresses or safe deposit boxes but not in accounts because most crises are accompanied by banking crises.”

A decade ago, many lost their life savings after the ruble plunged 71 percent against the dollar. Those fears prompted Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to pledge not to allow “sharp jumps” in the exchange rate, during a call-in television show Dec. 4.

‘Ideal Time’

Troika Dialog, Russia’s oldest investment bank, is betting the central bank will allow a one-time devaluation of the ruble of about 20 percent in January, following New Year’s and Orthodox Christmas celebrations.

“With the holidays at the beginning of January, companies won’t be fully working and people will be spending more money,” said Evgeny Gavrilenkov, Troika’s chief economist and a former acting head of the government’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. “That means demand for rubles will increase and that means it’s an ideal time to allow a devaluation.”

Russia has drained almost a quarter of its foreign-currency reserves, the world’s third-largest, since August as it tries to slow the ruble’s decline. The central bank has widened the trading band five times in the past month, effectively reducing its defense of the currency amid plunging oil prices.

Devaluation Skeptic

Urals crude, Russia’s main export earner, has slumped 72 percent since reaching a record $142.94 a barrel July 4. It fell below $40 for the first time in three years last week, compared with the $70 needed to balance the country’s budget.

The government will avoid a large, one-step devaluation because it wants to prevent a run on the banks and lure back foreign investors, said Chris Weafer, chief strategist in Moscow at UralSib Financial Corp.

“I’m skeptical a 10 to 15 percent devaluation will provide a significant boost for the economy because the sector that it will most benefit, manufacturing, is just too small,” he said.

The ruble will probably be allowed to drop in small steps to as low as 33 per dollar by the middle of 2009, from about 28 now, Weafer estimates. It will end next year at 26.8 because of a recovery in oil prices and a weaker U.S. currency, he said.

Svetlana Guseva isn’t taking any chances.

The 32-year-old mother of two from the southern city of Sochi plans to take her 8-year-old daughter, Dasha, to Moscow for the New Year’s holiday, a trip that will cost twice her family’s monthly income of about 30,000 rubles.

“This way at least we’ll have some memories,” she said.

Is the Fed Taking the First Steps to Selective Default and Devaluation?

We have been looking for an out-of-the-box move from the Fed, but this was not what we had expected.

The obvious game changing move would have been for the Treasury and the Fed to make an arrangement in which the Fed is able to purchase Treasury debt directly without subjecting it to an auction in the public market first. This is known as 'a money machine' and is prohibited by statute.

But as usual the Fed surprises us all with their lack of transparency. They are asking Congress about permission to issue their own debt directly, not tied to Treasuries.

This is known in central banking circles as 'cutting out the middleman.' Not only does the Treasury no longer issue the currency, but they also no longer have any control over how much debt backed currency the Fed can now issue directly.

If the Fed were able to issue its own debt, which is currently limited to Federal Reserve Notes backed by Treasuries under the Federal Reserve Act, it would provide Bernanke the ability to present a different class of debt to the investing public and foreign central banks.

The question is whether it would be backed with the same force as Treasuries, or is subordinated, or superior.

There will not be any lack of new Treasury debt issuance upon which to base new Fed balance sheet expansion. The notion that there might be a debt generation lag out of Washington in comparison with what the Fed issues as currency is almost frightening in its hyperinflationary implications.

This makes little sense unless the Fed wishes to be able to set different rates for their debt, and make it a different class, and whore out our currency, the Federal Reserve notes, without impacting the sovereign Treasury debt itself, leaving the door open for the issuance of a New Dollar.

What an image. The NY Fed as a GSE, the new and improved Fannie and Freddie. Zimbabwe Ben can simply print a new class of Federal Reserve Notes with no backing from Treasuries. BenBucks. Federal Reserve Thingies.

Perhaps we're missing something, but this looks like a step in anticipation of an eventual partial default or devaluation of US debt and the dollar.


Wall Street Journal
Fed Weighs Debt Sales of Its Own
By JON HILSENRATH and DAMIAN PALETTA
DECEMBER 10, 2008

Move Presents Challenges: 'Very Close Cousins to Existing Treasury Bills'

The Federal Reserve is considering issuing its own debt for the first time, a move that would give the central bank additional flexibility as it tries to stabilize rocky financial markets.

Government debt issuance is largely the province of the Treasury Department, and the Fed already can print as much money as it wants. But as the credit crisis drags on and the economy suffers from recession, Fed officials are looking broadly for new financial tools.

The Federal Reserve drained $25 billion in temporary reserves from the banking system when it arranged overnight reverse repurchase agreements.

Fed officials have approached Congress about the concept, which could include issuing bills or some other form of debt, according to people familiar with the matter.

It isn't known whether these preliminary discussions will result in a formal proposal or Fed action. One hurdle: The Federal Reserve Act doesn't explicitly permit the Fed to issue notes beyond currency.

Just exploring the idea underscores many challenges the ongoing problems are creating for the Fed, as well as the lengths to which the central bank is going to come up with new ideas.

At the core of the deliberations is the Fed's balance sheet, which has grown from less than $900 billion to more than $2 trillion since August as it backstops new markets like commercial paper, money-market funds, mortgage-backed securities and ailing companies such as American International Group Inc.

The ballooning balance sheet is presenting complications for the Fed. In the early stages of the crisis, officials funded their programs by drawing down on holdings of Treasury bonds, using the proceeds to finance new programs. Officials don't want that stockpile to get too low. It now is about $476 billion, with some of that amount already tied up in other programs.

The Fed also has turned to the Treasury Department for cash. Treasury has issued debt, leaving the proceeds on deposit with the Fed for the central bank to use as it chose. But the Treasury said in November it was scaling back that effort. The Treasury is undertaking its own massive borrowing program and faces legal limits on how much it can borrow.

More recently, the Fed has funded programs by flooding the financial system with money it created itself -- known in central-banking circles as bank reserves -- and has used the money to make loans and purchase assets.

Some economists worry about the consequences of this approach. Fed officials could find it challenging to remove the cash from the system once markets stabilize and the economy improves. It's not a problem now, but if they're too slow to act later it can cause inflation.

Moreover, the flood of additional cash makes it harder for Fed officials to maintain interest rates at their desired level. The fed-funds rate, an overnight borrowing rate between banks, has fallen consistently below the Fed's 1% target. It is expected to reduce that target next week.

Louis Crandall, an economist with Wrightson ICAP LLC, a Wall Street money-market broker, says the Fed's interventions also have the potential to clog up the balance sheets of banks, its main intermediaries.

"Finding alternative funding vehicles that bypass the banking system would be a more effective way to support the U.S. credit system," he says.

Some private economists worry that Fed-issued bonds could create new problems. Marvin Goodfriend, an economist at Carnegie Mellon University's Tepper School of Business and a former senior staffer at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, said that issuing debt could put the Fed at odds with the Treasury at a time when it is already issuing mountains of debt itself.

"It creates problems in coordinating the issuance of government debt," Mr. Goodfriend said. "These would be very close cousins to existing Treasury bills. They would be competing in the same market to federal debt."

With Treasury-bill rates now near zero, it seems unlikely that Fed debt would push Treasury rates much higher, but it could some day become an issue.

There are also questions about the Fed's authority.

"I had always worked under the assumption that the Federal Reserve couldn't issue debt," said Vincent Reinhart, a former senior Fed staffer who is now an economist at the American Enterprise Institute. He says it is an action better suited to the Treasury Department, which has clear congressional authority to borrow on behalf of the government.

Thinking the Unthinkable: Are the Markets Warning of a US Debt Default?

As we have previously stated, right now the US is on the path to a devaluation and a selective default on its debt and currency. No one can say 'how and when' with certainty. But surely it seems probable that there is a stop and a stumble in the growth of this mother of credit bubbles somewhere ahead.

Perhaps it may be more credible if one reads a similar speculation in the financial magazine Barron's.

Some have suggested that devaluation no longer has meaning, preferring depreciation. Why? Because what would one devalue the dollar against, as it is tied to no external standard? The Dollar is its own standard as the reserve currency of the word.

A bit of a technical nuance perhaps, a holdover from when money was related to independent stores of value. But we think the dollar can be devalued against the expectation of the marketplace that the growth of the money supply will keep pace with the net productive output of the US, and real relative purchasing power, and represent a store of value with some small variance for inflation.

It is always a mistake to assume that there are no external standards, no dissenting views, that things are merely what we say they are and should be, for everyone.

The standard is the 'full faith and credit of the United States.' And if that confidence is broken, the reversion to fundamental 'external' values may be impressive.

Unthinkable? Every currency that has ever been has eventually been destroyed and undergone a transformation. Even the US dollar has undergone evolutions and incarnations.

But few things are inevitable. The world may choose to create a one world currency, under the control of the Fed and the Central Banks, which is a prelude to One World Government. This would be one way to extend the existence of a fiat regime. Kill off all the alternatives, by force. A regime of the will to last a thousand years.

In the short term we may again see rallies in the bonds and dollar because of a flight to quality and a short squeeze on dollars, particularly in Europe. This is due to lags in the effects of a credit cycle decline on its various components.

Demand for dollars spikes in a flight to quality and debt payment squeezes such as that being experienced by some European banks, and then declines more slowly than the supply of dollars can ramp up in a declining credit cycle, leading to a 'liquidity crunch.'

This is particularly confusing to most casual thinking on economics. It helps if you really think about what a dollar represents, what money really is, to someone outside the system holding 'real goods' for sale.

At some point the ramp up of dollars meets and exceeds demand, and the cycle of inflation begins again. If the situation is particularly dire, the currency may be devalued to speed its supply as the US did in 1933. But without a new Bretton Woods type currency fix an inflation alone is much more likely.

As an aside, we think the Europeans should declare a force majeure and allow all non-euro debts, even in private contracts, to be settled in euros as part of a formal rejection of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

But these are all exogenous developments. For now, within a degree of probability, the US is on the road to a significant failure of its currency and debt, most likely through a nasty bout of inflation, selective bankruptcies, and ultimately the reissue of a new currency.

Searching for relative safe havens of value for wealth, as it had been in the 1970's, may be the premiere investment theme for the rest of this decade, and some part of the next.

Barron's
UP AND DOWN WALL STREET DAILY
Uncle Sam's Credit Line Running Out?
By RANDALL W. FORSYTH
NOVEMBER 11, 2008

The yield curve and credit default swaps tell the same story: the U.S. can't borrow trillions without paying a price.

WHAT ONCE WAS UNTHINKABLE has come to pass this year: massive bailouts by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, with the extension of billions of the taxpayers' and the central bank's credit in so many new and untested schemes that you can't tell your acronyms or abbreviations without a scorecard.

Even more unbelievable is that some of the recipients of staggering sums are coming back for a second round. Or that the queue of petitioners grows by the day.

But what happens if the requests begin to strain the credit line of the world's most creditworthy borrower, the U.S. government itself? Unthinkable?

American International Group which originally had to borrow what was a stunning $85 billion from the Fed to keep it from cratering in September, upped the total Sunday to $150 billion.

Monday, Fannie Mae reported a $29 billion third-quarter loss, far in excess of forecasts, raising the specter that the mortgage giant may need more money after the Treasury pledged to inject $100 billion in preferred stock financing in September.

Meanwhile, American Express received Fed approval to convert to a bank holding company, joining the likes of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, that have a direct pipeline to borrow from the Fed or the Treasury's TARP, the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Fund.

And, of course, Detroit is looking for a credit line from Washington. General Motors (GM) Friday warned it could run out of cash next year without a government loan. GM plunged another 23% Monday, to 3.36, as several analysts helpfully recommended selling shares of the beleaguered automaker that already had lost more than 85% of their value.

Visiting the White House Monday, President-elect Obama pressed President Bush to support emergency aid for GM and other automakers. The prospect for federal aid for GM ironically weighed on its shares as one bearish analyst said the price of the bailout could be a wipeout of common holders.

Be that as it may, it's all adding up. If the late Sen. Everett Dirkson were around today, he might comment that a trillion here, a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

Trillions are no hyperbole. The Treasury is set to borrow $550 billion in the current quarter alone and $368 billion in the first quarter of 2009. "Near-term pressures on Treasury finances are much more intense than we had thought," Goldman Sachs economists commented when the government announced its borrowing projections last week.

It may finally be catching up with Uncle Sam. That's what the yield curve may be whispering. But some economists are too deaf, or dumb, to get it.

The yield curve simply is the graph of Treasury yields of increasing maturities, starting from one-month bills to 30-year bonds. The slope of the line typically is ascending -- positive in math terms -- because investors would want more to tie up their money for longer periods, all else being equal. Which it never is.

If they expect yields to rise in the future, they'll want a bigger premium to commit to longer maturities. Otherwise, they'd rather stay short and wait for more generous yields later on. Conversely, if they think rates will fall, investors will want to lock in today's yields for a longer period.

The Treasury yield curve -- from two to 10 years, which is how the bond market tracks it -- has rarely been steeper. The spread is up to 250 basis points (2.5 percentage points, a level matched only in the past quarter century in 2002 and 1992, at the trough of economic cycles.

Based on a simplistic reading of that history and the Cliff Notes version of theory, one economist whose main area of expertise is to get quoted by reporters even less knowledgeable than he, asserts such a steep yield curve typically reflects investors' anticipation of economic recovery. (LOL, nicely phrased - Jesse)

Never mind that the yield curve has steepened as the economy has worsened and prospects for recovery have diminished. Like the Bourbons, the French royal family up to the Revolution, he learns nothing and forgets nothing.

As with so much other things, something else is happening this year.

The steepening of the Treasury yield curve has been accompanied by an increase in the cost of insuring against default by the U.S. Treasury. It may come as a shock, but there are credit default swaps on the U.S. government and they have become more expensive -- in tandem with an increase in the spread between two- and 10-year notes.

This link has been brought to light by Tim Backshall, the chief analyst of Credit Derivatives Research. The attraction of investors to the short end of the Treasury market is "juxtaposed with the massive oversupply and inflationary expectations of the longer end," he writes.

Backshall is not alone in this dire assessment. Scott Minerd, the chief investment officer for fixed income at Guggenheim Partners, a Los

Angeles money manager, estimates that total Treasury borrowing for fiscal 2009 will total $1.5 trillion-$2 trillion. That was based on $700 billion for TARP, a $500 billion-$750 billion "cyclical deficit," an additional $500 billion stimulus program and some uncertain amount for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Minerd doubts that private savings in the U.S. and foreign purchases of Treasury debt will be sufficient to meet those government cash. That leaves the Fed to take up the slack; that is, monetization of the debt.

However it comes about, Backshall's charts of the yield curve and the spread on U.S. Treasury CDS paint a dramatic picture. Both the yield spread and the cost of insuring debt moved up sharply together starting in September.

Let's recall what happened that month: the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac bailouts, the AIG bailout and the Lehman Brothers failure. The two lines continued their parallel ascent with the announcement and ultimate passage of the TARP last month. And evidence mounted of an accelerating slide in growth.

Cutting through the technical jargon, the yield curve and the credit-default swaps market both indicate the markets are exacting a greater cost to lend to Uncle Sam. And it's not because of anticipated recovery, which would reduce, not increase, the cost of insuring Treasury debt against default.

All of which suggests America's credit line has its limits.

At the beginning of the Clinton Administration in the early 1990s, adviser James Carville was stunned at the power the bond market had over the government. If he came back, Carville said he would want to come back as the bond market so he could scare everybody.

President-elect Obama may come to think Clinton had it easy by comparison.