S and P 500 and QE

source

How the Fed Keeps Feeding the Financial Crisis

Bill Bonner writes:

Wow! Is this fun, or what? We are so lucky, we can scarcely believe it. We’re getting to live through something most people only read about in the history books…a monetary meltdown.

Last week, our own central bank – the US Federal Reserve – announced that it would print up another $600 billion. This will bring the total to $2.3 trillion added in just a bit over 24 months.

Is this crazy? Is it foolish? Is it stupid? Yes! It is all of those things and more – vain, pigheaded, destructive, reckless…

…supply your own adjective!

Intervention on this scale is risky. So, you might expect that the Fed has some sort of computer program – trusted, reliable, tested and proven – that tells it exactly how much money to put into the system via its QE program…and when.

Well, if you think that, you’re dreaming. The Fed has no such computer program. No formula. Not even a theory that will hold up to inspection.

The whole thing is just a willful, dangerous gamble.

And we’re just happy that it is happening now…when we’re still alive to appreciate it.

It’s not everyone who gets to see a genuine, real-life example of hyperinflation…depression…money panic…and currency suicide. We’re going to see them all. At least, we think so…

But we know the risk of a crash is high. Investors are buying stocks as speculations. The Fed’s hot money is not really going to improve the economy. Everyone but Ben Bernanke knows that. Investors are just speculating that it will push up the stock market. They’re gambling too – just like the Fed.

And maybe it will. But it will be temporary. Because the only thing that can push up the stock market in a reliable way is real growth. And you don’t get real growth by running the printing press. If you did, Zimbabwe would be growing faster than China.

No, dear reader, hot money produces hot action in the market. Speculative fever. Bubbles.

…And crashes, of course.

read the entire essay

Mass Inflation?

The Mogambo Guru writes:

The thing that has sent me into Mogambo Panic Mode (MPM) over the terrifying inflationary implications is the latest outrage from the Federal Reserve, reported at Bloomberg.com as, “The Federal Reserve will buy an additional $600 billion of Treasuries through June, expanding record stimulus and risking its credibility in a bid to reduce unemployment and avert deflation.”

It turns out that the announced $600 billion, in six measly months, as perfectly horrific as it is, is not the whole story, as we later find out when Bloomberg later in the article reports, “Including Treasury purchases from reinvesting proceeds of mortgage payments, the Fed will buy a total of $850 billion to $900 billion of securities through June, or about $110 billion per month, the New York Fed said in accompanying statement.”

$110 billion per month! Per month! Per freaking month! Gaaahhhh!...

In case you were wondering, the purpose of the QE program is to create the money that the government needs to borrow this year. Otherwise, the Treasury has to try and sell $2 trillion in bonds to the few people who have saved some cash money, but it is ludicrous to think that these few people could possibly come up with $2 trillion! Hahaha!

And then more next year, and the year after, and the year after! Hahaha! Insane!

And if you think that this will not end Very, Very Badly (VVB), then I am pretty sure that I am on safe ground to say that you don’t know squat about economics. I say this without fear of contradiction for two important reasons...

And I also say this without fear of contradiction because there is not one example in the last 4,500 years – 4,500 years! – where any of the thousands and thousands of corrupt, dirtbag governments that borrowed themselves into such overwhelming bankruptcy and/or created so much new fiat money to spend that had ever, ever, ever, either magically or miraculously, succeeded in preventing total disaster by (unbelievably) creating, borrowing and spending more money!...

To even suggest otherwise is Sheer Freaking Lunacy (SFL), and if you do, then you will be shunned by decent people and end up in the gutter, career-wise, writing about economics for The New York Times or be a laughable egghead university professor at Princeton (“Them that can, do, and those that can’t, teach, or end up as chairmen of the Federal Reserve where they can prove that they can’t, but they thought they could because they were willingly gullible halfwits who could not see the utter stupidity of their preposterously simplistic neo-Keynesian econometric crapola of equations and computer models, which is such an absurd idea that it makes me guffaw in a Loud Mogambo Laugh Of Scorn (LMLOS) for Ben Bernanke, Paul Krugman and all the lowlifes who agree with either of them about anything.)”

read the entire essay

Bill Bonner: Creating Bubbles to Maintain Stability

Bill Bonner writes:

“Global Backlash Grows,” says The Wall Street Journal.

This is the backlash against Ben Bernanke’s crackpot money-printing scheme.

The foreigners don’t like it. Because the US is flooding the world with “hot money.” This fast cash chases oil, commodities, collectibles, farmland – just about everything.

It creates bubbles. It distorts markets. And it will certainly lead to busts and bankruptcies…and maybe to hyperinflation, too.

So, sit back and enjoy the show, dear reader. It’s the greatest show on earth. Yes, it will most likely lead to embarrassment and poverty in the US. Yes, the US dollar will cease being the world’s reserve currency. And yes, America’s leading economists – many of whom have won Nobel prizes – will be shown to be hapless goofballs.

But this is all good news to us. Under the leadership of modern US economists, Americans have been getting poorer for the last 10 years...

How came it to be that the taxpayers are on the hook for $600 billion more in financial responsibilities with no vote of their elected representatives? No point in even asking the question….

This is, after all, late, degenerate state-guided capitalism. If Congress can make citizens buy something they don’t want – such as health insurance – surely the Fed, which is a privately-owned bank, can write checks from the taxpayers’ checkbooks. Heck, nothing is too absurd.

So, the Fed goes boldly where no sensible person would want to go. It is trying – trying! – to create bubbles…asset bubbles, to make people feel like they have more money. If people feel richer, the feds reason, they’ll spend more money. Presto, we’ll be richer.

read the entire essay

QE2 and Inflation

Stefan Karlsson writes:

It is generally assumed, and rightly so, that the new round of "quantitative easing" will generate higher inflation in the United States. But it is rarely explained just why it will do so. After all, QE2 will not be conducted by dropping dollar bills from helicopters.

Well, there are essentially three mechanisms by which it happens: higher money supply, lower money demand and lower supply of goods and services.

1) Regarding money supply, it should be noted that by lowering interest rates, QE2 will boost demand for loans. Higher demand for loans will in a fractional reserve banking system generate a higher money supply. Given a certain level of money demand and supply of goods and services, a higher money supply will result in higher price inflation.

2) Regarding money demand, higher inflationary expectations will cause people to be less willing to hold money (as its real value is expected to drop), thus reducing money demand. And lower money demand has a very similar effect on prices as a higher money supply.

It should be noted though in this context that to the extent that QE2 lowers nominal interest rates, this will increase money demand as the opportunity cost of holding money drops.

So the net effect of Fed bond purchases on money demand depends on to what extent it raised inflationary expectations more than it lowers nominal interest rates.

And it seems that the increase in inflationary expectations is this time somewhat bigger than the drop in nominal yields.

As of this writing, the nominal 5-year yield has dropped 21 basis points since August 31 (from 1.33% to 1.12%) while the inflation indexed 5-year yield has dropped 72 basis (from 0.14% to -0.58%) points since August 31, implying that inflationary expectations has increased 51 basis points (from 1.19% to 1.70%) during that period.

Thus, QE2 has likely reduced money demand somewhat.

3) Regarding the issue of reduced supply of goods and services, it should be noted that to the extent that QE2 reduces the value of the dollar and to the extent that companies adjust prices, it will raise import and export prices, causing a reduction in the inflow of foreign goods and services and increase in the outflow, reducing the supply of goods and services available to Americans.

A lower supply of goods and services will given certain levels of money supply and demand increase the dollar price of goods and services.

In conclusion we can clearly see that by a combination of a higher money supply, a reduction in money demand and a reduced domestic supply of goods and services, QE2 will clearly increase price inflation. The only uncertainty is just how big this effect will be.

source

Quantative Easin'

QE2: $600 Billion

The Federal Reserve cannot solve all the economy’s problems on its own. That will take time and the combined efforts of many parties, including the central bank, Congress, the administration, regulators and the private sector.

-Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors

This is what life after “QE2” looks like:

• Record gold prices
• Stocks back at pre-Lehman levels
• And a dollar cruising toward its 2008 lows.

Everything is rallying…in terms of depreciating dollars. Mission accomplished. Ben Bernanke needs George W. Bush’s ol’ “shock and awe” flak jacket.

In case mainstream media coverage made you glaze over, here’s the quick and dirty of the Federal Reserve’s fateful decision…

• The Fed will buy $600 billion in Treasuries over the next 8 months
• The mortgage securities the Fed bought during QE1 now reaching maturity will continue to be rolled over into Treasuries, as they have been since August. That’s another $275 billion, give or take
• There was also the caveat that more of this could be in the works if unemployment stays high and inflation (as defined by core CPI) stays low.

Hmmn… If the federal budget deficit is supposed to run $1.2 trillion during fiscal 2011 (that’s the consensus guess)…and the Fed will purchase $875 billion in Treasuries over the next eight months (that’s two-thirds of a year)…

This is yet another reason we don’t expect the House Republicans to convert to the gospel of fiscal responsibility any more than they did last time they were in the majority: They can indulge in demon spending unto oblivion…and the Fed will have their back...

source

Bill Bonner writes:

The Fed announced a $600 billion purchase program, from here until June. Even in dollars, that’s a lot of money to throw into a market. The stated purpose is to lower interest rates even further…trying to coax business into hiring and consumers into spending.

Will it work? Will it create real prosperity…growth…and wealth? Ha. Ha. Nope. No chance.

How can we be so sure? Well, theory and practice. In theory, it makes no sense. Real jobs require real investment by real investors, entrepreneurs and businesspeople. It takes time. Skill. Luck. Giving the banks more money (which is what happens with QE) merely destabilizes serious producers. They don’t know what to expect. Cheap money forever? Will inflation increase? What should interest rates be? They don’t know. So, they wait…and watch…and the slump gets worse. Besides, the economy is correcting for a reason. Any interference is bound to be a mistake.

The lessons from experience are even more damning. There is no instance in all of history when printing press money actually turned around a correction. And if you really could make people better off by printing money, Zimbabweans would be the world’s richest and most prosperous citizens. Followed by the Argentines; they’ve got 25% inflation right now.

Nope; it isn’t going to work. And even if it seems to be working…it will actually be making people worse off.

source

Bill Gross writes:

The dollar is in danger of losing 20% of its value over the next few years if the Federal Reserve continues unconventional monetary easing, Bill Gross, the manager of the world's largest mutual fund, said on Monday.

source

Bernanke, the Fed, and the Dollar

Joel Bowman writes:

All eyes, meanwhile, are on US Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, who is widely expected to announce his next round of systematic dollar debasement a few days from now – a strategy otherwise known as “quantitative easing,” or “QE” for short. Trepid investors, unsure of what the value of the world’s reserve currency will be a week from now, sit on the sidelines, awaiting their cue from the man with the magic chopper...

Of course, the battle between central bank-created fiat money and its arch nemesis, gold, is not a new tale. Money meddlers have been tussling with the precious metal since the coin clipping days of the Romans. You’d think the bozos would have learned their lesson by now. But, as Bill likes to say, what one generation learns, the next is quick to forget...

“What’s happened since 1971,” the article wonders aloud, “when President Nixon formally broke the link between the dollar and gold? Higher average unemployment, slower growth, greater instability and a decline in the economy’s resilience.”

And that’s not all.

“For the period 1971 through 2009, unemployment averaged 6.2%, a full 1.5 percentage points above the 1947-67 average, and real growth rates averaged less than 3%. We have since experienced the three worst recessions since the end of World War II, with the unemployment rate averaging 8.5% in 1975, 9.7% in 1982, and above 9.5% for the past 14 months. During these 39 years in which the Fed was free to manipulate the value of the dollar, the consumer-price index rose, on average, 4.4% a year. That means that a dollar today buys only about one-sixth of the consumer goods it purchased in 1971.”...

So, what does a central banker do when one round of money printing doesn’t bring about the desired effect? Does he revisit first principles and reexamine the evidence? Or does he double down on his bets, defending his actions with increasingly zealous evangelism? Bernanke gives the world his answer on Wednesday.

read the essay

The All But Forgotten Self-Governing Economy

Joel Bowman writes:

The inability of Mr. Bernanke – or anyone else for that matter – to hold back the tide of necessary correction ought to be obvious to all.

The study of economics wasn’t always the bottomless well of embarrassment it has come to be. There was a time when moral philosophers – as those of the trade were once known – spent their days pondering things of actual importance. They listened to the market murmurs of the day, instead of forecasting the unknowable events of tomorrow…they observed rather than tinkered…and asked questions instead of falsifying answers.

How ought members of a society allocate limited supply in an environment of unlimited demand? Is there a fair and equitable way to achieve such a goal? What controls, if any, should be employed to govern the process? Etc., etc., etc…

Although economics is itself an imperfect science, a “soft science,” as some assert, the perfect laws of science nevertheless bind it. Quantitative easing, for instance, is and always will be a bogus theory, a monetary mallet made of liquid, unable to bend anything into shape and forever doomed to flooding the system. Borrowing from one pocket to finance the other is a mug’s game; just as increasing the supply of money in a closed system must necessarily devalue all pre-existing units by a commensurate measure. Put another way, two plus two is never equal to five…never mind what the modern economist has to say on the matter.

Similarly, one can be reasonably certain that there are only two ways in which an economy, and indeed an entire society, is capable of governing itself. The first is by force; the second by means of voluntary cooperation. That both are mutually exclusive should be self-evident. One cannot be partly violated any more than they can be a little bit pregnant. The concept is oxymoronic, as well as ordinarily moronic. The idea is akin to that of a “voluntary tax.” Obviously, no such thing truly exists. It is a donation or it is an act of theft. Plain and simple.

Now wait just a moment, we hear some say. What about the rule of the majority? After all, we can’t very well wait around for everyone to agree on everything all the time. That may be true. But, to paraphrase an old adage, the road to ruin is paved with the whims of political expediency. A system built on a foundation of coercion is sentenced to failure, whether by invasion from without or revolution from within.

For its part, the voting process only serves to muddy the waters. Democracy, as Winston Churchill once observed, is the worst form of government…except for all those others that have previously been tried. Even if 99% of the people vote for some kind of sales tax, for instance, a full and very important 1% are still subject to what essentially becomes legalized theft...

It was perhaps David Hume who expressed it best when, in his monumental First Principles of Government, he wrote, “Nothing appears more surprising to those who consider affairs with a philosophical eye, than the ease with which the many are governed by the few.”

Self government, through individual and collective acts of voluntary cooperation, therefore, seems to be the only philosophically consistent, defensible form of government available to man. The state, with its various forms of coercion, shrouded in the cloak of good intention and peddled by forecast-mongering central bankers, be damned.

read the entire essay

The Fed: Quantitative Neutrality?

The Fed's goal (according to the technical note from the NY Fed) is to "maintain the face value of outright holdings of domestic securities" at approximately $2.054 trillion.

The red line on this graph is the amount of outright holdings on the Fed's balance sheet. The dashed line is the new target level for quantitative neutrality.

The outright holdings were expected to fall by about $200 billion by the end of 2011 (some have estimated as high as $400 billion), and that would represent tightening in the face of high unemployment and below target inflation.

source