oftwominds

What's Priced Into the Market Uptrend?

2012-01-27T06:56:00.000-08:00

Is the operative phrase here "priced to perfection"?

With everything from stocks and bonds to 'roo bellies rising as one trade, it may be a good time to ask: what's priced into the market's uptrend? We say "bad news is priced in" when negative news is well-known and the market has absorbed that information via the repricing process.

When the market has absorbed all the "good news," then we say the market is "priced to perfection:" that is, the market has not just priced in good news, it has priced in the expectation of further good news.

Markets that are priced to perfection are fiendishly sensitive to unexpected bad news that disrupts the expectation of continuing positive news.

So what have global markets priced into this uptrend across virtually all markets?Just as a partial list, we might include:

1. The Eurozone's sovereign debt/banking crisis has either been resolved or lowered to a simmer that won't damage global financial markets.

2. The austerity resulting from the extend-and-pretend fixes to the Eurozone's crushing debt and insolvent banking system will do no more than dent the Eurozone's major economies in 2012.

3. The U.S. economy has dodged recession and is growing slowly but surely.

4. All the primary metrics of that growth such as employment, GDP and retail sales are all rising smartly and will certainly continue on that rising trendline.

5. The bursting China's real estate bubble has had essentially zero effect on its growth as measured by GDP.

6. The slowdown in China's largest export market, the Eurozone, will have a marginal effect on China's overall growth rate.

7. The developing economies will continue expanding faster than the developed economies, and this rapid growth will continue pushing commodity demand and prices higher.

8. Geopolitical conflicts that might impact the supply of oil have all been priced into the price of oil.

9. Political developments in Europe will not disrupt global financial markets.

10. Global central banks (i.e. the ECB and the Federal Reserve) have effectively restabilized the global financial system via ample liquidity and massive expansions of money supply and balance sheets.

11. Volatility has been banished by this central bank-backstopped stability.

12. The strong yen will have negligible effects on the global economy or on Japan's growth and stability.

This is just a partial list of all the "good things" that are priced into global markets.If all of these good things are well-known and already priced in, then we have to ask what other good news could possibly turn up to drive prices even higher? If "positive surprises" are priced in, then how can positive surprises drive prices higher?

Put another way: if everyone who could buy in has already bought in to ride the "good news" wave on expectations of more good news to come, then where is the new money coming from to drive prices even higher?

If markets are indeed priced to perfection, then the second line of inquiry is: what happens if expectations of enduring stability and good news are dashed by "unexpected" bad news? Could volatility suddenly return from banishment? Could prices suddenly decline as the market reprices in risks that have been dismissed as non-factors?

Bulls have been claiming that the "good news" is a powerful trend that will only continue showering us with positive reports of ever-rising GDP, sales, revenues and profits. If that story is called into question, then how does a market priced to perfection reprice this doubt and risk?

How does a market priced to perfection reprice a "black swan" financial event, that is, a low-probability event that comes to pass despite the low odds? What if the official suppression of risk over the past 4 months has greatly increased the pressure in the global financial system and thus the odds of a Black Swan appearing "unexpectedly"?

These are questions to ponder in the weeks and months ahead. Time will tell if this is indeed a market priced to perfection or a market that has barely begun its march higher.

I have been unable access email this week; thank you for your patience and understanding.

If this recession strikes you as different from previous downturns, you might be interested in my new book An Unconventional Guide to Investing in Troubled Times (print edition) or Kindle ebook format. You can read the ebook on any computer, smart phone, iPad, etc.Click here for links to Kindle apps and Chapter One. The solution in one word: Localism.

Readers forum: DailyJava.net.

Order Survival+: Structuring Prosperity for Yourself and the Nation (free bits) (Kindle) orSurvival+ The Primer (Kindle) or Weblogs & New Media: Marketing in Crisis (free bits)(Kindle) or from your local bookseller.

Of Two Minds Kindle edition: Of Two Minds blog-Kindle

Thank you, Pasi K. ($5), for your very generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.

Thank you, Eric V.B. ($25), for your extremely generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.

Between Various Rocks and Various Hard Places

2012-01-26T07:44:00.000-08:00

The U.S. and European economies are firmly between various rocks and various hard places.

Having stipulated that "Forecasting Is Not Humanity's Strength," I will not make any foolish forecasts that will assuredly be proven wrong, but it is undoubtedly true that the U.S. and Europe are both entering a "crunch time" politically and financially.

In essence, both economies are between multiple rocks and multiple hard places. Eventually, this ceases to be an academic question and becomes one of actual financial impact on people via higher taxes, smaller checks, lower purchasing power, etc.

For example, the dismal failure of the Federal Reserve's QE2 goosing of the economy has eroded its political support and thus its freedom of action. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has the look of someone who is realizing his own limits and is thus pondering retirement (a speculative forecast I made last year, i.e. that Ben wouldn't last and would be forced out or quit).

Bernanke has more or less confessed that he 1) doesn't understand why the economy isn't responding "like it should" i.e. as described in textbooks, and 2) that he is tired of the political heat created by QE2 and he is dropping the burden of "saving" the U.S. economy.

He looks like a person who has lost his confidence and is going through the motions until he can figure out a way to exit the leadership stage gracefully. It is painfully obvious to all that his QE2 did nothing to heal the real economy while attracting global attention and ire. The whole project was lose-lose, with the only gain being "extend and pretend."

Meanwhile, the Fed has to keep printing money to enable every debt holder has enough to service their debt next month, never mind next year. As frequent contributor Harun I. noted in a private email to me, the amount of leverage is so staggering that if "real money" (cash, gold, etc.) were applied to debt, a vast sum would still be left unpaid.

That's a rock and a hard place, to be sure, as I have noted on the blog: if you print enough money to keep the Status Quo in "extend and pretend" mode, then you get inflation, which creates another set of difficulties and acts as a tax on the entire economy.

The loss of faith in Fed fixes is profound, part of the delegitimization process I have mentioned in previous Musings and blogs.

The same loss of faith is evident in Europe. The EU leadership has to cobble together another "extend and pretend" bailout of Greece, but nobody believes it will fix anything--that belief has been shattered. Once that faith is lost, then the value of "extend and pretend" is lost as well.

There is no way Greece can meet its debt obligations, even as its creditors clamor for it to sell off its assets. Why bother, if most of the debt will remain unpaid? The answer is to transfer the wealthof thenation to international banks, of course, but the Greek people may not acquiesce in their impoverishment.

The only other option is for bondholders to "take a haircut," that is, get back less than 100% of their bond. The EU leaders are banking (pun intended) on some sort of "minor default" being the "fix" that puts the problem to rest, but they fail to grasp the subsequent loss of faith in the entire euro banking system.

If Greece's bondholders are going to take a loss, then what's stopping those holding Irish, Portuguese, Sanish or Italian debt from taking a loss as well?

The answer is of course nothing: there is no way to stop the "haircut" from happening in every cituation where the borrower is insolvent.

And as borrowers default, then so too do insolvent lenders.

This is the ultimate rock and hard place: the only way to clear the economy for future growth is to clear away the deadwood of uncollectible debts, yet clearing away the impaired debt will necessarily take down all the "too big to fail" banks on both continents, an action that is politically "impossible" as those banks have their hands on the throats of the governments in question.

As I have noted before, once faith in "extend and pretend" policies has been lost, then the next "extend and pretend" fix will no longer have its desired effect of calming the waters. Indeed, the failure of central institutions to grasp the nettle will be recognized as a failure that dooms the Status Quo.

The "solution" for three years has been "extend and pretend," and now that faith in that muddle-through strategy has been lost, then there are only two choice open to policy makers:

1) enact a visibly transparent "extend and pretend" fix once again, basically pushing the crisis forward once agin for a few weeks or months, or 2) grasp the nettle and pursue a politically "impossible" real fix that wipes out uncollectible debt and insolvent borrowers and lenders.

Unfortunately for the Status Quo, the cat is out of the bag, so to speak; nobody believes minor policy tweaks or more bailouts will actually fix their economies. So the "extend and pretend" fixes that will be presented as meaningful will be increasingly recognized as artifice and propaganda.

This will feed the profound political disunity that already characterizes the politics of the U.S. and the E.U.

I would like to believe that the people are finally ready to lead their leadership to real solutions, but their insecurity, doubt and fear about their own slice of the pie seems to have frozen them in a weird warp: they recognize "extend and pretend" is futile, but they have no confidence in the "impossible" choices, either, as the risk is doing anything other than "extend and pretend" frighten them.

The way out of the dilemma would be a new political consensus forms in favor of writing off all bad debt and breaking the banks' grasp on our collective throats. Right now that seems as "impossible," but all sorts of other "impossible" things have happened in the past decade.

The one thing we know is truly impossible is that "extend and pretend" will actually fix anything.

As noted here before, a number of intersecting cycles suggest the end-game of "extend and pretend" will play out in 2012-2013.

This entry is drawn from Weekly Musings 28. Weekly Musings Reports are sent to major contributors and subscribers as a thank-you for their support.

Of Two Minds Kindle edition: Of Two Minds blog-Kindle

Thank you, Joseph S. ($20), for your splendidly generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.

Thank you, Richard B. ($10), for yet another extremely generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your steadfast support and readership.

The New American Divide

2012-01-25T09:15:00.000-08:00

The widening divide between the Upper Caste and everyone below is not just of income and wealth--it is also cultural and values-based.

A recent Wall Street Journal article entitled The New American Divide by demographer Charles Murray described a widening cultural divide between the "haves" (the upper middle class, roughly the top 20% managerial/creative class) and the "have-nots," what many would call the lower middle class and working class.

Murray chose to focus on Caucasian Americans to avoid all the issues and emotions of ethnicity, but I think we can apply many of his class-related observations to ethnic minority populations in the U.S. as well.

This article (based on a forthcoming book) is important not because it encapsulates this tangled subject, but because it offers a well-researched first step to a much broader spectrum of issues that the author touches upon in passing.

The cultural divides the author cites is symptomatic of powerful financial and social forces that operate well below the surface of everyday life. I don't claim to have "answers" to these issues, but I find it remarkable that the author ends up concluding that community has been displaced by the Savior State, and the ultimate solution is to return to a life based on community rather than handouts and subsidies from the Savior State.

This aligns with my own conclusions stated in my books.

I think there is much that was left out of his carefully apolitical exploration of class in America and much left out of his general explanation for the widening divide betweem the "haves" and the "have-nots."

I think he is correct in fingering Savior State "free money" as the primary cause of the dissolution of working-class America's communities and households: with welfare, Section 8, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. then working-class women no longer need a husband to afford children, and men either drop out, become financially dependent on someone else, enter the "war on drugs"/prison complex or "work the system" to avoid working altogether.

He is also correct in pointing out the self-sustaining feedback loops created by Savior State support and Power Elite membership: both groups' children grow up in worlds where welfare or Elite status and perquisites are the expected norm. In this profound way, people grow up in completely different Americas, and these culturally inherited mindsets are very difficult to pierce and change.

What he delicately avoids exploring is the reality that the Status Quo works very well not just for the top 1% but also for the top 20% that forms what I call the Upper Caste of American society: the technocrat, managerial, creative class that does the heavy lifting for the top 1% who own most of the assets and income streams.

The bottom 80% is employed as service workers/debt serfs or bought off with bread-and-circus welfare to keep them quiet and passive. The system doesn't have to work for the bottom 80%, it just has to sustain them at a level that doesn't spark revolt.

The housing bubble was a gigantic scam foisted on the top layer of the working class and the lower layer of the middle class as a "sure-fire way" to join the speculative financial frenzy that enriched the top 1% and their enablers, the Upper Caste technocrat class. When the bubble burst, so did fantasies of living the Upper Caste lifestyle without the hard slog to a meaningful university degree and long hours slaving away for Corporate America to join the Upper Caste.

This notion that America no longer works for the bottom 80% (I would even say the bottom 90%) is something that standard-issue pundits like Murray cannot speak to or even admit. His "solution" is ultimately for the 80% to get on with life as an underclass and make the best of living in an economy which serves their interests only enough to avoid open insurrection.

Murray, a media-pundit in his field, studiously avoids the role of mass media in the creation of the divide. He touches briefly on the fact that we all once watched the same TV shows, a unifying cultral factor, but only because they were the only shows on TV. What I see, and what I believe research supports, is a vast chasm between the media the Upper Caste consumes and what the "have-nots" consume.

The really creative class is too busy to watch much TV or many films, or while away time texting and talking on cellphones. Rather, they create the context and content for these media and devices, and do so by avoiding addiction to their own creations--much like drug pushers never sample their own wares.

The managerial Upper Caste have all the devices and services, but their workload limits the amount of time they have to consume "entertainment" and communicate with text, twitter, email, etc. for amusement. But it is not just a matter of time constraints; they are highly conscious of the fact that consuming media and "entertainment" in quantity does not further their career. What provides the elitist sheen they desire to "fit in" to the upper tier of their caste?

The signifiers of membership in this High-Caste status are leisurely foreign travel in prestigious cities or exotic areas and foreign postings, study abroad, the ability to speak a foreign language, tasteful art in the home and office, facility with corporate-speak, participation in High-Caste cultural events such as the symphony, art-house foreign films, theater, an association (however flimsy) with an Elite university or other respected institution, pursuit of costly sports such as skiing, boating, etc., and last but not least, a network of associates and "friends" (real friendship being an increasingly rare commodity in America) who can be mentioned in conversation as owning/participating in these same high-caste signifiers.

The working class, on the other hand, is a voracious consumer of all media and entertainment; the TV is often left on 24/7 in working-class households and merely muted at night, and an iPod or internet radio is always providing a soundtrack to every activity, while Facebook (i.e. Global Channel of Me) can be a near-obsession, interrupting or taking precedence over all other activities, including, it seems, sex. Texting is constant, and social success is measured by signifiers such as the latest film on bootleg DVD, high-quality street drugs, large collections of films and music (i.e. media) and in rural areas, fishing and hunting trophies.

As correspondent Chuck D. recently observed, the divide extends to money management: the High-Caste class is deeply interested in investments and view high-earning investments as signifiers of status while the working class only sees the spectrum of consumption.

When High-Caste politicos like Al Gore or Mitt Romney attempt to cross the divide and mimic working-class signifiers, their attempts are either comical, wooden or downright painful. They live in a completely different America from the voters they are clumsily appealing to.

In some ways I have a bit of experience on both sides of this divide, having been lucky enough to graduate from an Elite prep school, snag a (non-Elite) university degree and gather the requisite bits of foreign languages and travel.

On the other hand, I worked in the construction/building field for many years alongside both deserters from Corporate/Central State America and working-class guys for whom construction was a relatively high-paying avenue to a middle-class life, if they saved their money (unfortunately not the norm).

There are two other critical long-term issues not addressed in the article:

1. The "mancession"-- the trend toward an economy that values the "female" skills of communication, cooperation and education, while the "male" virtues of a strong back and a physical-world skill have steadily lost value. This is a very complex set of issues, but we can "state the obvious" by noting that the decline in factory/manufacturing work has apparently hurt males more than females, who have shifted to retail, healthcare, pink-collar and government work more readily than working-class males.

2. The ladder from the lower classes to the Upper Caste--upward mobility--is crumbling. Many commentators have noted that the gateway of upward mobility has narrowed. Yes, anyone can "make it in America," but making it America requires an increasing number of cultural knowledge bases and values--the very values and knowledge bases that are eroding in the classes below the top 20% Upper Caste.

While Murray describes the complex and knotty issue of declining marriage rates and soaring out-of-wedlock births, the larger question is what is powering these trends. Are men simply no longer needed as breadwinners, or are they being "selected out" for other reasons? Could the mass media once again be a critical if unspoken factor, as it has presented malehood as little more than an extended adolescence without end and fatherhood as a role for bumbling losers?

Yes, it's easy to "blame the media" but once again we must start by asking who is absorbing thousands of hours of this politically convenient (i.e. distracting and deranging) "entertainment" and who avoids it like the plague. How can ceasless propaganda not influence those who watch it daily for hours on end?

As many oftwominds readers have noted, Step 1 in liberating oneself from propaganda is to stop watching broadcast TV.

This divide speaks very directly to the core problems we face, which are not simply financial or political but cultural.

Of Two Minds Kindle edition: Of Two Minds blog-Kindle

Thank you, Dolores S. ($20), for your excellently generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.

Thank you, Simon C. ($50), for your wondrously generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your steadfast support and readership.