|
As gold flirts with 20-year highs, we are hearing more from the "gold bugs" or,
as they are sometimes appropriately called, the "doom-and-gloomers". Appropriately,
because a gold bug's current outlook for the future of traditional financial
assets such as stocks, bonds and currencies is not optimistic, particularly
in the US. A gold bug traces today's financial problems back to the removal
of gold backing from global currencies; without such backing, there is no limit
to the amount of money that politicians and the banking system can create.
Monetary inflation inevitably leads to price inflation, and creates asset bubbles
and excess debt that have historically led to financial collapses. However,
pointing out these realities has earned gold bugs the label of doom-and-gloomers.
For the most part, they are ignored by the ever-optimistic mainstream media
and are relegated to offbeat websites and publications.
There is, however, a key spokesperson from the mainstream - Alan Greenspan,
the most powerful financial person in the world today - whose voice cannot
be ignored. On the surface he toes the party line and goes along with traditional
optimism. But when you listen carefully to his words and read between the lines
of his speeches, you will find another message. It is a message remarkably
similar to that preached by the gold bugs, the doom-and-gloomers. In fact,
if you dig deep below the surface, down to his root beliefs, you will discover
that Mr. Greenspan is a closet gold bug.
That's right. Alan Greenspan is a gold bug. A doom-and-gloomer right up there
with the best of them. On close review of some of his recent speeches it will
become apparent that his comments on issues like the potential for a derivatives
crisis, the potential drop in asset prices, the housing bubble, the coming
social security crisis, oil supply risks, the rising budget deficit, rising
long term interest rates and the record high current account deficit are the
same issues that gold bugs are warning about. These speeches often go unreported
by the mainstream media, or are buried on the back pages, but most importantly
they have not been compiled into one comprehensive summary.
Although they are warnings, in some cases they are not clearly stated. For
example, in reporting on Greenspan's August 26 speech at Jackson Hole, CNN
said: "Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan issued a veiled warning Friday
on the risks to the economy from trade and budget deficits -- as well as the
recent run-up in home prices."
"Veiled warning" is an apt description. Greenspan has a talent for delivering
veiled messages in general. As financial writer Doug Gnazzo says: "This
dude was born with a silver tongue... able to joust with the best of them". And
from a recent Forbes article: "His prophecies rivet everyone, even if
no one can parse what he's saying. His wife, broadcaster Andrea Mitchell, jokes
that he had to propose three times before she understood him." Greenspan's
vagueness has been noted so often it has earned its own name - Greenspeak.
So what has Greenspan actually said about the problems facing the US economy?
A look at his words on each of the issues named above provides some important
insights.
Derivatives Dangers
In remarks to Congress in October, 1998:
"On occasion there will be mistakes made, as there were in LTCM and
I will forecast without knowing who, what or where, that there will be
many more. I would suspect there are potential disasters running into a
very large number, in the hundreds."
In 1998, a hedge fund called Long Term Capital Management guessed wrong in
the bond markets. LCTM was founded by two Nobel prizewinners, and had the who's
who of both Wall Street and Washington on its board of directors. Because our
global financial system is so intertwined, LTCM's losses of over $1.2 trillion
of derivatives posed a risk so large that the whole global financial system
could have collapsed had the Fed not intervened. In addition to LTCM, there
have been the high-profile collapses of Orange County, Barings Bank and Enron,
all thanks to derivatives losses. Greenspan believes there are hundreds of
such potential disasters waiting to happen.
The risks are much higher now, since the total amount of over-the-counter
derivatives has grown from about $70 trillion in 1998 to over $370 trillion
today. There is a total of $89 trillion in US derivatives, of which three banks
hold 95%; J.P. Morgan alone holds over $46 trillion.
Government-sponsored entities (GSE) such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may
now pose systemic risks. Between 2000 and 2003, Fannie Mae reported derivatives
losses of $25 billion. With respect to the systemic risks posed by Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac Greenspan warned in February 2004:
"The Federal Reserve is concerned about the growth and scale of the
GSEs' mortgage portfolios, which concentrate interest rate and prepayment
risks at these two institutions."
The Potential Drop in Asset Values
Greenspan at a symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City,
Jackson Hole, Wyoming on August 26, 2005:
"This vast increase in the market value of asset claims [stocks, bonds,
houses] is in part the indirect result of investors accepting lower compensation
for risk. Such an increase in market value is too often viewed by market
participants as structural and permanent... But what they perceive as newly
abundant liquidity can readily disappear ... history has not dealt kindly
with the aftermath of protracted periods of low risk premiums."
The long stretch of increasing stock, bond and real estate prices together
with low interest rates has made investors feel secure and willing to accept
lower returns. Since all markets are cyclical in nature, busts follow booms
and prices tend to revert to their mean. As interest rates rise, stocks, bonds
and real estate will all be negatively impacted and could result in painful
declines.
Have a good look at the last sentence in his quote. You might have to read
it a couple of times, but those words could have been uttered by the most ardent
doom-and-gloomer. The words "history has not dealt kindly with" imply
difficult times ahead for assets, and this is one of the few unveiled warnings
you'll hear from the grandmaster of spin.
The Housing Bubble
Greenspan at Jackson Hole on August 27, 2005:
"Nearer term, the housing boom will inevitably simmer down. As part
of that process, house turnover will decline from currently historic levels,
while home price increases will slow and prices could even decrease. As
a consequence, home equity extraction will ease and with it some of the
strength in personal consumption expenditures."
The housing boom will end, prices will level and could even fall. Either way,
the consumer spending enabled by the refinancing boom will slow down. The current
housing boom is a direct result of low interest rates and lax lending standards.
Today, buyers can get low-cost, variable-rate mortgage loans for the full purchase
price without having to document their income. As rates rise, many homeowners
will be forced to convert their loans to a fixed rate at several points higher.
As a consequence, many will no longer be able to afford the monthly payments
and with no equity left, they will simply default. The increasing number of
unsold homes could then lead to a collapse in prices. Once this happens, there
will be a major impact on the economy as it loses its most important engine
of growth.
The Coming Crisis in Social Security
Greenspan before the Committee on Financial Services, US House of Representatives,
February 11, 2004:
"The imbalance in the federal budgetary situation, unless addressed
soon, will pose serious longer-term fiscal difficulties. Our demographics--especially
the retirement of the baby-boom generation beginning in just a few years--mean
that the ratio of workers to retirees will fall substantially. Without
corrective action, this development will put substantial pressure on our
ability in coming years to provide even minimal government services while
maintaining entitlement benefits at their current level, without debilitating
increases in tax rates. The longer we wait before addressing these imbalances,
the more wrenching the fiscal adjustment ultimately will be."
Greenspan in testimony before the House Budget Committee, March 2005:
"When you begin to do the arithmetic of what the rising debt level implied
by the deficits tells you and add interest costs to that ever-rising debt
at ever-higher interest rates, the system becomes fiscally destabilizing.
What you end up with is probably a stagnant economic system."
Greenspan before the Budget Committee, US Senate, April 21, 2005:
"I fear that we may have already committed more physical resources to
the baby-boom generation in its retirement years than our economy has the
capacity to deliver."
According to the 2004 Financial Report for the US Government, that year's
total Federal Budget Deficit exceeded $11 trillion for the year. Apart from
the cash deficit of $412 billion, the balance was made up of unfunded Social
Security and Medicare benefits. Since last year's real deficit almost exceeds
the entire US GNP, it is apparent why Greenspan says that more promises have
been made to the baby-boom generation than the economy has the capacity to
deliver. In the next few years, worker contributions to Social Security will
fall far short of payments to retirees. There is no trust fund of accumulated
contributions. Existing retirees were paid out of current contributions and
the surplus was spent by various governments to fund general programs. Making
up the shortfall will create serious challenges for the federal budget. It
is estimated that unfunded Social Security liabilities now exceed $40 trillion.
As these obligations fall due the only political choice the US government will
have is to monetize these obligations, resulting in massive increases in monetary
inflation and a resulting negative impact on the value of the US dollar.
Oil Supply Risks
Greenspan to the National Italian American Foundation, Washington, D.C., October
15, 2004:
"... the current situation reflects an increasing fear that existing
reserves and productive crude oil capacity have become subject to potential
geopolitical adversity. These anxieties patently are not frivolous given
the stark realities evident in many areas of the world."
Many industry experts predict that total world oil production will soon peak,
even as demand continues to grow. The looming problem of peak oil is enough
cause for concern, leading as it will to rising prices while existing supplies
become insufficient to meet growing global demand. In addition, almost all
remaining reserves are located in politically unstable areas such as the Middle
East and former Russian provinces, making the possibility of supply disruptions
even greater. The term "geopolitical adversity" could also refer to plans by
Iran to start an oil bourse in March 2006, and begin pricing its oil in euros.
Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has stated that he will sell his oil in euros as well,
and Russia's Vladimir Putin is considering doing the same. The negative impact
to the US economy of rising prices and possible supply disruptions that the
pricing of oil in euros would have will result in a major negative impact on
the US dollar.
The Rising Budget Deficit
Greenspan before the Committee on Financial Services, US House of Representatives,
July 20, 2005:
"Large deficits result in rising interest rates and ever-growing interest
payments that augment deficits in future years. Unless that trend is reversed,
at some point these deficits would cause the economy to stagnate or worse."
Greenspan at Jackson Hole, August 27, 2005:
"Monetary policy, for example, cannot ignore the potential inflationary
pressures inherent in our current fiscal outlook, especially those that
could arise in meeting commitments to future retirees. However, I assume
that these imbalances will be resolved before stark choices again confront
us and that, if they are not, the Fed would resist any temptation to monetize
future fiscal deficits. We had too much experience with the dangers of
inflation in the 1970s to tolerate going through another bout of dispiriting
stagflation. The consequences for both future workers and retirees could
be daunting."
The present budget is inflationary and the problems ahead will make it worse.
In 2004 the US federal government's gross debt topped $7.4 trillion: that amounts
to $25,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. If unfunded commitments
to Social Security and Medicare are added in, the burden rises to $145,000
per person, or $350,000 per full-time worker. In his 2004 report, David Walker,
Comptroller General of the United States, issued a very clear warning to the
president, the senate and congress, reinforcing Greenspan's warning:
"Without reform, known demographic trends, rising health care costs,
and projected growth in federal spending for Social Security, Medicare
and Medicaid will result in massive fiscal pressures, that if not addressed,
could cripple the economy, threaten our national security and adversely
affect the quality of life of Americans in the future."
Rising Long-Term Interest Rates
Greenspan at a banking conference in Germany, November 19, 2004:
"The fiscal issues that we face pose long-term challenges, but federal
budget deficits could cause difficulties even in the relatively near term.
Long-term interest rates reflect not only the balance between the current
demand for, and current supply of, credit, they also incorporate markets'
expectations of those balances in the future. As a consequence, should
investors become significantly more doubtful that the Congress will take
the necessary fiscal measures, an appreciable backup in long-term interest
rates is possible as prospects for outsized federal demands on national
saving become more apparent. Such a development could constrain investment
and other interest-sensitive spending and thus undermine the private capital
formation that is a key element in our economy's growth prospects."
While the Federal Reserve sets short-term rates, the bond market sets long-term
rates. As budget deficits increase, long-term interest rates, determined
by the bond markets, are likely to rise. Higher debt-service costs will then
further increase budget deficits. In addition, higher long-term rates will
have a negative impact on corporate earnings, and lead to higher mortgage
rates. This will ultimately lead to a slowdown in investment, faltering economy
growth and a decline in both equities and real estate.
Greenspan went on to say:
"Rising interest rates have been advertised for so long and in so many
places that anyone who hasn't appropriately hedged his position by now
is desirous of losing money."
The Record-High Current Account Deficit
Greenspan before the Committee on Financial Services, US House of Representatives,
February 11, 2004:
"To date, the US current account deficit has been financed with little
difficulty... investors evidently continue to perceive the United States
as an excellent place to invest. Moreover, some governments have accumulated
large amounts of dollar-denominated debt as a byproduct of resisting upward
exchange rate adjustment . Nonetheless, given the already-substantial
accumulation of dollar-denominated debt, foreign investors, both private
and official, may become less willing to absorb ever-growing claims on
US residents."
Greenspan speaking to the European Banking Congress 2004, Frankfurt, Germany,
November 19, 2004:
"...net claims against residents of the United States cannot continue
to increase forever in international portfolios at their recent pace...
Given the size of the US current account deficit, a diminished appetite
for adding to dollar balances must occur at some point. The trade deficit
cannot continue to increase forever at the recent pace."
In recent years the US has been able to convince foreign investors, both private
and government, to hold its debt. The Current Account Deficit now stands at
nearly 7% of GDP, the highest on record. Typically, when the deficits of third-world
countries exceed 6% a collapse in the currency soon follows. It is unlikely
that foreigners will be willing to accumulate US debt forever. At some point
they will stop increasing their holdings and the US government will be forced
to monetize the deficits. This will result in an increase in the money supply
and higher inflation. Corporations and consumers may not be able to borrow
on favourable terms, leading to a decline in economic growth and possibly a
recession. If foreign debt-holders decide to start selling their US dollar
holdings, a precipitous decline in the dollar could result.
These are but a few of the warning - some veiled, some very clear - contained
in the dozens of speeches made by Greenspan over the last several years. On
close examination, it seems the only difference between a raging gold bug and
the still-in-the-closet Greenspan is that a gold bug states that a crisis will
happen, while Greenspan implies that a crisis might happen. But what else can
he do? The most powerful man in the financial world can't yell "Danger!" from
the rooftops. Imagine the impact on the markets if the Chairman of the Federal
Reserve were to issue dire warnings about the state of the economy. That kind
of transparency doesn't go along with his job.
In trying to gauge Greenspan's words, you must also consider his past beliefs.
Greenspan was an ardent gold bug and a true believer in the gold standard.
Here are a few of the things he has said about gold over the years.
From a 1967 article entitled Gold and Economic Freedomhttp://www.gold-eagle.com/greenspan041998.html:
"The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare
statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion
of credit. In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect
savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of
value. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the 'hidden' confiscation
of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands
as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty
in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."
By any interpretation, these are the words of a true gold bug. "In the
absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation
through inflation." Could his words be any clearer? Could his
pro-gold sentiment be any stronger? It could be argued that these words
were written in 1968 and much has changed since then. However, as he recently
autographed a copy of this article for Congressman Ron Paul, Paul asked
him if still believed what he had written. Greenspan replied: "I
wouldn't change a word."
In addition, here's what he said on December 19, 2002 when he spoke to the
Economic Club of New York in New York City:
"In the two decades following the abandonment of the gold standard in
1933, the Consumer Price Index in the United States nearly doubled. And,
in the four decades after that, prices quintupled. Monetary policy, unleashed
from the constraint of domestic gold convertibility, had allowed a persistent
over issuance of money. As recently as a decade ago, central bankers, having
witnessed more than a half-century of chronic inflation, appeared to confirm
that a fiat currency was inherently subject to excess."
It will be interesting to see what Mr. Greenspan has to say once he retires
in January 2006 and is free of the restraints his position places upon him.
As events unfold, and he is writing his memoirs, he will be able to say, "I
told you so." It may take some time before these events take place. In 1996
he gave what is probably his most famous warning:
"But how do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated
asset values, which then become subject to unexpected and prolonged contractions
as they have in Japan over the past decade?"
Markets around the world fell 3-4%, and the US market fell 2% at the opening.
The NASDAQ continued from 1,300 at the time of this speech to its peak of 5,049
on March 10, 2000 before plummeting 78% to 1,114 in October 2002. Today it
is still more than 50% below its peak.
Given the devastating consequences many investors suffered when equity markets
collapsed, it seems only prudent to take defensive action based on the warnings
given by Greenspan himself.
One of the most effective ways of securing wealth in turbulent financial times
is to ensure that investment portfolios are properly diversified and include
an appropriate allocation to precious metals. Precious metals move in the opposite
direction to financial assets, and act as portfolio insurance. In a recent
study entitled Diversification with Gold, Silver and Platinum,
Ibbotson Associates stated that an allocation of 7.1%, 12.5% or 15.7% for conservative,
moderate and aggressive portfolios respectively could increase returns and
reduce portfolio risks. They also concluded that precious metals, in bullion
form, provided positive returns when they were needed the most. Bearing in
mind the implications of Greenspan's warnings, an allocation considerably higher
than the recommended Ibbotson allocations may very well be a prudent move.
|