Monday, June 13, 2016

New BIS Warning? - "Stronger US Dollar is Putting Strains on Global Financial Markets"

Last month we covered a speech by BIS Chief Economist Claudio Borio. Mr. Borio said there was "no doubt the dominance of one currency (the US dollar) creates challenges for the IMFS" (International Monetary and Financial System). He went on to say that what he felt was needed were "stronger anchors at the national and international level." You can read his full speech here.


This week we have a new speech by BIS Economic Adviser Hyun Song Shin. In this new speech we once again see concerns about the US dollar discussed. Below I have pasted in the extract of the speech and links to some news articles covering it. You can read the full speech here. This speech has a lot of information in it so I may do a followup article on it. I recommend reading the full speech.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extract Summary of the Speech

"A stronger US dollar is putting strains on global financial markets and the banking system, leading to tensions not only in emerging market economies, but in "safe haven" currencies such as the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc. One intriguing development has been the breakdown of covered interest parity (CIP), which ensures that interest rates implicit in currency markets are consistent with those in money markets. CIP broke down during the financial crisis, and deviations have reappeared in the last 18 months, with the size of the deviations fluctuating in step with a stronger dollar. The breakdown reflects, in part, the tensions created by the divergence of monetary policy among major central banks and the withdrawal of easy dollar credit conditions that prevailed after the financial crisis, all in the context of the dollar's special role in the global financial system. As the dollar has strengthened, investors have found it harder to roll over hedges put in place when the US currency was depreciating and investors were borrowing more in dollars to take advantage of low interest rates. BIS data show that the euro and the yen may be starting to take on the features of an international funding currency, following in the footsteps of the dollar."



Reuters article on this speech  (some quotes below)


Distortions in dollar-based interest rate markets resulting from the U.S. currency's two-year rally pose a growing threat to financial stability, the Bank for International Settlements warned on Wednesday.

"Hyun Song Shin, head of research at the BIS, said a breakdown in what is known as covered interest parity and the resulting strains in cross-currency basis rates could have a negative impact across the global financial system.

The Swiss-based BIS acts as a forum for major central banks.

"In spite of the outward tranquility, there are tensions beneath the surface," Shin told a World Bank conference in Washington.

"The financial tail appears to be wagging the real economy dog. This is not how things are supposed to work. The key takeaway is that a stronger dollar is associated with more severe market anomalies," Shin said."                      . . . . . .
"Shin's comments on Wednesday follow similar warnings a month ago from his BIS colleague Claudio Borio that the dollar's overwhelming position of dominance in the global financial system posed risks to world financial stability."
AFR.com article on this speech (some quotes below)

"Financial markets have become the tail "wagging the real economy dog", as American monetary policy and a strong US dollar strain the global financial system, according to the Bank for International Settlements.


In a development that has shocked policymakers, mounting financial pressures are extending beyond well known risks in emerging market economies to safe haven currencies such as the Japanese yen and Swiss franc.

BIS economic adviser Hyun Song Shin said the world economy was dancing to the "tune of global financial developments".                         

. . . . . .

"The pre-eminent role of the US dollar as the global funding currency means that US monetary policy has an especially important place in the determination of global financial conditions," the BIS said."

Read the full article here


(note: I added the underlines above & below for emphasis of some key points)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My added comments: Because the news articles covering this speech clearly view this speech as a warning on systemic risks posed by a strong US dollar, I will add this to our list of IMF and BIS warnings page

Note the statement in the second article attributed to the BIS above that says "American monetary policy and a strong US dollar strain the global financial system." Also note the comment that "US monetary policy has an especially important place in the determination of global financial conditions." This sounds as if it is directed at the US Fed.

If US dollar strength is viewed as a risk to the global financial system, it seems unlikely the US Fed would raise interest rates into the face of such a perception since that would tend to further increase dollar strength which the BIS says is "putting strains on global financial markets and the banking system."

Added note 6-15-16 (2 pm): As we might have expected, the Fed annouces they will not be raising interest rates and even suggested they might do fewer increases in the future than previously expected. Janet Yellen noted that international uncertainties loom large which suggests they are paying attention to comments like the one above from BIS and others. The Fed has more peer pressure not to raise rates from what I can see at this point in time.

Sunday, June 12, 2016

IMF Chief Economist Clarifies IMF Position in Interview

Recently the IMF released a new study that appeared to suggested the "neoliberal" policies employed in recent years had the impact of increasing inequality and had not fully worked as intended. Here is an excerpt from that report:


"Instead of delivering growth, some neoliberal policies have increased inequality, in turn jeopardizing durable expansion"

Apparently, there was some concern at the IMF that this report was misinterpreted in the financial media, so IMF Chief Economist Maury Obstfeld did a followup interview posted on the IMF web site to clarify things. Below are some excerpts from the interview which you can read here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMF Survey: The Fund has made clear in recent years its willingness to examine its macroeconomic thinking and policy approaches. Some have called this revolutionary—is this the case?
Obstfeld: I would describe the process as evolution, not revolution. The Fund has long tried to build on its experiences in the field and on new research to improve its effectiveness in economic surveillance, technical assistance, and crisis response.
It’s fair to say that the shock of the global financial crisis led to a broad rethink of macroeconomic and financial policy in the global academic and policy community. The Fund has been part of that, but, given the impacts of our decisions on member countries and the global economic system, we view it as especially important for us constantly to re-evaluate our thinking in light of new evidence.
That process has not fundamentally changed the core of our approach, which is based on open and competitive markets, robust macro policy frameworks, financial stability, and strong institutions. But it has added important insights about how best to achieve those results in a sustainable way.
IMF Survey: Do you agree with some who have argued that a recent article in F&D (“Neoliberalism: Oversold?”) signifies a major change in Fund thinking? For example, is the IMF now saying that austerity does not work and, indeed, that it exacerbates inequality?
Obstfeld:     That article has been widely misinterpreted—it does not signify a major change in the Fund's approach.
I think it is misleading to frame the question as the Fund being for or against austerity. Nobody wants needless austerity. We are in favor of fiscal policies that support growth and equity over the long term. What those policies will be can differ from country to country and from situation to situation.
Governments simply have to live within their means on a long-term basis, or face some form of debt default, which normally is quite costly for citizens, and especially the poorest. This is a fact, not an ideological position.
Our job is to advise how governments can best manage their fiscal policies so as to avoid bad outcomes. Sometimes, this requires us to recognize situations in which excessive budget cutting can be counterproductive to growth, equity, and even fiscal sustainability goals.

note: I added the underline and bold features in the answer above for emphasis

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My added comments: In the interview Mr. Obstfeld goes on to say what we instinctively know. He says that obviously governments need to contain their debt to sustainable levels so that "the public debt can be repaid without very high inflation". He adds that some countries do not contain their debt properly. He goes on to say that at some point the problem reaches a point where the debt cannot be repaid. At that point the IMF then will recommend "debt re-profiling or debt reduction" (as they do now for Greece). This solution "requires creditors to be a part of the cost of adjustment."


Here are some observations we can make from this interview:

despite the fact that we all know debt needs to be contained at a sustainable level, countries abuse debt anyway which leads to loss of public trust over time

- debt does matter eventually - Mr. Obstfeld says "governments have to live within their means on a long term basis, or face some form of debt default"

- we can expect that at some point when debt becomes unsustainable it will be "re-profiled or reduced". This process will involve creditors (people who hold the debt) taking a hit on government debt they presumed was safe to own

- how Greece is resolved may well set a model or precedent for how future unsustainable debt situations are handled so we should see watch to see how that turns out

The choice of words used by Mr. Obstfeld is interesting to me. He says governments that do not live within their means have to "face some form of debt default". This suggests there are multiple forms of debt default. I would guess this might include restructuring debt so that the term of the debt is vastly extended (40 or 50 years for example), direct write off of a portion of the debt, or devaluation of the currency of the debt to pay it off using currency with a much lower value in the future. 

That last option is not one you are likely to hear mentioned officially, but does happen. In fact, some believe it is the preferred method of some governments because it may be the least noticeable to the public. It makes it appear that the nominal value of the debt was paid off even while the purchasing power of the currency involved takes a big hit in the process. Some believe that the US dollar will eventually suffer this fate if the US does not contain its debt over time to sustainable levels.



Added note: In this recent interview, securities lawyer Dimitri Lascaris says that he thinks there is some "incoherence" within the IMF (see quote below). He also implies that the recent research paper (noted above) that asks if Neoliberalism was Oversold may have been released without the full knowledge of IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde. That's hard to imagine, but this article may be of interest to readers so I posted the link to it. Here is quote from Mr. Lascaris from the interview:

"And so even as the IMF research staff, I mean, this is a most remarkable situation, is acknowledging for the first time the failures of neoliberalism, and that it doesn’t achieve its own goals, it continues to insist, the management of the IMF, the leadership of the IMF continues to insist that countries like Greece engage in extraordinarily rapid and extreme deregulation, and extraordinarily severe austerity. All of this just paints a picture of complete incoherence within the IMF itself."

Friday, June 10, 2016

Former BOE Chief Mervyn King: Talks Risks in the Global Economy

A hat tip to Willem Middelkoop (OMFIF Advisory Board) for pointing us to a new article by the former head of the Bank of England, Mervyn King. The article appears in a World Gold Council publication for June 2016 (see the pdf link at top of page to download the June report). Willem reviews the article here on his own blog


Below are a few selected quotes of interest from the new article by Mervyn King and then some added comments.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“If we had too much spending and too much borrowing before the crisis and we have even more spending and borrowing now, then we’re moving further and further away from the point that we’ve got to get back to. So monetary policy is not only meeting diminishing returns, but it’s making the ultimate adjustment even bigger. It’s taking us in the wrong direction,”

. . . . . .

“Monetary policy has reached its limits,” he says. “If you repeatedly bring down interest rates to try and persuade people to spend today rather than tomorrow, it works for a while. But they become increasingly resistant to being asked to spend their resources now rather than save for the future. And the longer domestic spending is in excess of potential output, the more you have to borrow from the rest of the world to finance it. Eventually people wake up to the fact that this is unsustainable and then you get a sharp adjustment downwards.“

. . . . 

“If we don’t quite know what the future holds, there is little point in getting carried away by very fancy mathematical calculations of optimal portfolios. Don’t rely on past data to be a good guide. Try to think through what mix of assets gives you the best chance of surviving some big event. That must mean including assets that are negatively correlated or uncorrelated in your portfolio, he says.

. . . .

“And I am very struck by the fact that over many many years, central banks, governments and individuals have always, despite the protestations of economists, held some gold in their portfolio. Obviously, there is no high running return, but when unexpected things happen, particularly when governments rise and fall, then gold is a means of payment that everyone is always prepared to accept. And I think that’s why even central banks have always had a role in their portfolios for gold,” he adds. In recent years, many central banks in Asia and South America have been increasing the amount of gold in their portfolios. King believes this is a sensible approach. “I can understand why they feel that some proportion of their portfolio needs to be in gold.”


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My added comments: Whenever we get public comments on this topic by former high ranking officials in the financial system, we need to pay attention. In this case we have the former head of the Bank of England saying that present monetary policy is unsustainable and will not solve the basic problems in the present global financial system. He goes on to add that people should "try to think through what mix of assets gives you the best chance of surviving some big event." After that he talks about how gold has historically done that and how central banks view it as an important reserve asset and hedge. That is pretty much what Jim Rickards, Willem Middelkoop, many other analysts and this blog have been saying for some time, so it's important confirmation from a highly credible source.

Added notes: Here is another relevant article on this that may be of interest to readers and Kitco also covers this here

In addition, a reader here tipped me that on his blog 'The Money Trap', Robert Pringle takes note of this new article by Mervyn King which has clearly raised some eyebrows. Mr. Pringle founded Centralbanking.com and was also an Executive Director for The Group of 30. In his blog article, Mr. Pringle focuses on the comment by Mervyn King that the US could potentially renege on its debt obligations with China if a major conflict arose in the future between the US and China. He concludes with this comment:


"But for Mervyn King to say that there are circumstances in which the US could annul its debts is astonishing. Mervyn King’s alarmist warning goes far beyond scenarios outlined in his recent book “The End of Alchemy”

Additional note: A thank you to Willem Middelkoop for his kind comments on his twitter feed. I will add that Willem often points me to important articles and research papers that help me cover the topic this blog is all about (potential monetary system change). Readers here benefit from his help.

Sunday, June 5, 2016

A Gold Backed SDR (or Yuan)? There's Clearly Smoke - Is There a Fire?

If you follow the topic of potential monetary system change at all, you know that there is a lot of speculation around the world that China (and Russia) are quietly and steadily pushing to toward a future where the US dollar does not occupy its current position as the dominant global reserve currency. It's pretty easy to establish that this is true based on public statements by officials and other credible sources of information.


Where there seems to be a divergence of views however, is exactly what would eventually replace the US dollar in that role. For years a number of gold advocates have insisted that China intends to either back the yuan with gold or push for a gold backed SDR to take over from the US dollar. They cite the fact that China has been making a big effort to build up its gold reserves and promote gold ownership by its citizens as support for this view. They also point to China opening the new gold trading exchange earlier this year and Chinese purchases of gold related assets like vaults and mining companies.


On the other hand, I am unable to find any Chinese official that has publicly stated that China intends to officially back the yuan with gold or that the SDR should be officially backed with gold. PBOC Governor Zhou Xiaochuan clearly did call for the SDR to take on a leading role in 2009 (see this paper top of page 3). He had this to say at that time:


"The allocation of the SDR can be shifted from a purely calculation-based system to a system backed by real assets, such as a reserve pool, to further boost market confidence in its value."


This year he repeated his call for broader adoption of the SDR but did not mention any kind of gold backing in his remarks as far as I know. So I will leave it to the reader to decide if he was thinking about gold in his 2009 statement quoted above when he suggested backing "by real assets."


All this talk caused me to decide that it might be useful to post recent comments by both Jim Rickards and Dr. Warren Coats (former IMF) on this topic. In his recent monthly webinar Jim Rickards talked directly about this so we have very recent comments by him we can look at. Dr. Warren Coats agreed earlier this year to do a Q&A style interview for readers here about his Real SDR proposal. In the interview I asked him about gold backing for the SDR so we have his recent thoughts on this as well. Below I have pasted in Jim's comments and Dr. Coats comments to make it easy to compare them. After that I will add a few comments.

Jim Rickards Recent Comments on SDR Gold Backing
(from one Q&A in his recent webinar)


Jon:  "There’s one other voice, but this one’s really demure, and I don’t know quite how to interpret it. Alex pointed this out from a speech just published by the chief economist for the Bank of International Settlements. While addressing the issue of diversification away from the dollar, he basically says that merely diversifying currencies doesn’t work. Then he goes into analysis of the structural problems in the world’s monetary and financial system.
He goes on to say that the system lacks what he calls an effective anchor, but he doesn’t describe what that anchor might be. Is that speech possibly clearing the way for introducing gold as a more central and overt player in the organization of the international monetary system?"
Jim:  "There’s no doubt about it. You’re referring to Claudio Borio, head of monetary economic research at the Bank for International Settlements or the BIS. For listeners who may not know, the BIS is the central bankers’ central bank. I’ve often referred to the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, as the central bank of the world because they have this money printing function, but the BIS is even older than the IMF. It was created in 1930 and is based in Basel, Switzerland
I call it a tree house for central bankers. Much like a little child wants a tree house to get away from their parents or get away from scrutiny, this is where the top central bankers, the G10 economies, go once a month. They have a nice lunch overlooking a river there in Switzerland. They close the doors. There are no minutes, no records, no statements, no press conferences, and no accountability. Nobody knows what goes on inside that room unless you’re in the room or speak to someone who was.
. . . . .
Claudio Borio is their chief monetary economist. Just last week he gave a speech in Zurich, Switzerland (see our blog article on this here), and said exactly what you said, Jon; the international monetary system is rudderless and has no anchor. There’s no gold standard and there’s no dollar standard. From 1980 to 2010, the reason things were not more chaotic was because we had a dollar standard. That may not be a strong anchor, but it’s something. The US was committed to a strong dollar before President Obama launched into the currency wars in 2010. Now there’s no anchor at all.
I’ll relate two other conversations I may have mentioned on the podcast before, so I’ll be brief. I spoke to Ben Bernanke, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, in Korea not long ago. Shortly thereafter, I spoke to John Lipski. John is an interesting figure. He was the only American ever to head the IMF, which is odd because the deal at Bretton Woods stated that an American would head the World Bank and a European or non-American would head the IMF. How on earth do you get an American head of the IMF? It’s never happened.
The answer is it happened once when Dominique Strauss-Kahn got arrested and had to resign under dubious circumstances, to say the least. They weren’t ready with a successor, so John stepped in. He was the first deputy managing director, so in effect he became acting head of the IMF.
I spoke to both of them, head of the Fed and head of the IMF, 9000 miles apart, in two separate conversations. They both used the same word to describe the international monetary system. They said it’s “incoherent.” I knew they didn’t rehearse that for my benefit. I knew that that was in the air. Incoherent just means no anchor, no rules to the game, and that’s exactly what Claudio Borio said last week.
Basically, the whole world wakes up and every day is jump ball. We don’t know what currencies are worth. We don’t know who’s up or who’s down. Part of the reason there’s a flight to gold is because at least with gold you have a little bit more confidence in it. They’re not printing any more of it and mining output is only about 1.6% a year, so the physical supply doesn’t go up that much under the best of circumstances.
Borio also said effectively that the international monetary system is incoherent, there’s no anchor. He referred to the SDR (Special Drawing Rights) which is the world money issued by the IMF. This was an all-day monetary conference with other speakers including William Dudley, president of the Federal Reserve back in New York.
Borio made reference to the fact that some of the speakers were referring to SDRs. He said, “Why is the SDR any more of an anchor than anything else?  What is the anchor for the SDR?” I think it’s a very good question. He just raised it rhetorically and didn’t answer it, but of course, there is no anchor. Left hanging in the air is gold. Gold has been an anchor.
Special Drawing Rights is a misleading name. Just think of it as world money and it’s really easy to understand. SDR is world money printed by the IMF. The IMF has a printing press and can print these SDRs and hand them out, so don’t let the funny name or the initials SDR throw you off. It’s world money printed by the IMF out of thin air, is handed out to the members, and gets used like any other kind of money. It’s not that hard to figure out.
Interestingly, when the SDR was invented in 1969, it was convertible into gold. The definition of an SDR was a fixed weight in gold, and they actually called it paper gold. It was meant to expand reserves at a time when the US was still on the gold standard. Well, they got rid of that within two years. When the US abandoned gold in 1971, the IMF abandoned the gold linked to SDRs very shortly thereafter sometime around 1972 or so. Now the SDR is just another fiat currency.
I’ve hypothesized this in my books and in particular chapter 11 of The Death of Money. You could have a gold-linked SDR with some reference to gold. That would address Borio’s argument, and obviously, once you do that, if you want to avoid deflation, you’re talking about much, much higher prices for gold.
I’ve said publicly that I expect gold to go to $10,000 an ounce, which I do. When I say that, it’s not a number I pull out of the air just to attract attention or to be provocative. It’s actually the implied non-deflationary price and the lowest price gold would have to be in a gold standard to avoid deflation. Any lower dollar price for gold would be deflationary and a blunder. It would throw the world into a recession if not a full-blown global depression that you couldn’t get out of. I’m not saying you have to have a gold standard; I am saying that if you have a gold standard, you have to get the price to at least $10,000 an ounce.
Going through all these hedge fund mavens, professors like Ken Rogoff, economists like Claudio Borio, and others, this is very much front and center in the elite conversation today."


Dr. Coats Comments on Gold Backing Earlier This Year


Q: Would you view your proposed 'Real SDR' currency as still being a fiat currency even though valued using a 
basket of goods and commodities?

A: I don’t consider the designation of a currency as fiat (or not) as very useful.  I prefer to classify monetary regimes as those with a hard peg (redeemable for something else for a fixed and know price, as with the SDR valuation basket) or a soft peg (exchangeable at fluctuating market rates, as with a money growth rule or an inflation target).  All legal tender money can be used to pay taxes, the amounts of which are fixed in amounts of such currencies.  This establishes one source of its demand and market value.

Q: Some readers will of course want to see any new global reserve currency backed by gold instead of being
a fiat type currency. What are your thoughts on that view? Do you think China has any preference to see
gold re-enter the monetary system in some way?

A: See my comments to 5 above.  The choice is between fixing the price of the SDR to an amount of gold (as it was initially) or to a broader basket of goods and or commodities.  The price of gold has not been very stable.  I would prefer, and I think most people would prefer, fixing the price of the SDR to a broader basket of goods rather than to just one such as gold.

Q: A question I get from readers is why would the public trust a new version of a fiat currency if the existing 
US dollar version were to collapse in a crisis? What could be done to restore public confidence in a new
version of a fiat currency? 

A: The Real SDR Currency Board I propose would, like other existing currency boards, be fully backed with assets equal in value to the SDRs issued.  That is also true of the U.S. dollar and most other currencies, but the Federal Reserve is not obligated to redeem its currency at any particular price.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My added comments: When I research the various views on this topic (future gold backing for the yuan or the SDR) I find three prominent views. 

One is the belief that China is quietly planning what would amount to coup to replace the US dollar with a gold backed yuan or SDR. Here is a recent article that shows you an example of that view by William Engdahl

A second view is that both China and the IMF (West) may eventually agree to a gold backed SDR of some kind. In this view the yuan is not viewed as a viable currency to replace the dollar, only the SDR. This is the view that Jim Rickards talks about above. Please note the comments I put in bold type in Jim Rickards statement above. Jim took a very nuanced position in his answer. Although he speculated about some kind of future gold backed SDR and tied that in to what Claudio Borio said in his recent speech, please note that Jim stated clearly that Claudio Borio did not refer to gold as the future anchor for the SDR. In his speech Mr. Borio simply said that at present there is no anchor to the SDR of any kind. Also, please note that near the end of Jim's answer he says, "I'm not saying you have to have a gold standard . . ."  

I wanted to make that clear because even though Jim talked quite a bit about the idea of some kind of gold backing to the SDR, he did not say there is any official plan to do that or that he knows that it will happen. He just speculates that it is a possible way to anchor the SDR in response to the question raised by Mr. Borio in his speech. This is important to emphasize because right now I know of no official plan of any kind to put the SDR or any other global currency contender back on a gold standard. If such a plan exists, it is a truly secret plan that I have no knowledge of.

Lastly (the third view), whenever I get input from anyone I would view as an expert with experience and connections inside the global financial system, they tend to talk about the SDR as a possible global reserve currency without any official gold backing. Dr. Coats has a specific proposal we have covered here that would use a basket of goods based on an index (see question #4) rather than just gold and you can see his comments on this directly above.

I don't know which alternative is more likely to evolve if we do get a so called "reset" of the monetary system and the US dollar is replaced as global reserve currency. I believe that the most important factor for any currency is that the public has trust in it. Therefore, I guess that any of the above alternatives could unfold depending on what the public would trust and accept. That is a complete unknown to me. First we have to actually have some kind of "reset" for it to matter anyway. So far no reset has taken place and I know of no plan for a reset any time soon. I have speculated that another major financial crisis could change that.

I follow a lot various information sources in an effort to stay as informed as I can. What I can report is that without question there is a lot "smoke" (speculation) that gold will be used again in some way to back a new global reserve currency. What I am waiting to see is if there is really a "fire" (a real plan) behind all the smoke or not. I don't have the answer, but above you can read and compare the views of two leading experts who have talked about it recently. You can decide for yourself if Chinese Governor Xiaochuan was thinking of gold or not in his 2009 paper on the SDR when he talked about "a system backed by real assets."

Added notes: Here is an OMFIF work paper (2013) relevant to this topic commissioned by the World Gold Council. (foreword by OMFIF Advisory Board Chairman Meghnad Desai). This article on the World Bank web site suggests that a multi reserve currency system (dollar, euro, renminbi) is most likely to replace a US dollar dominated one by 2025. Also, Jim Rickards will debate gold with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg TV on June 23rd (4:30 ET).

Additional added notes: After reading this article Willem Middelkoop pointed me to two additional studies that have been done on gold related to the SDR. This first one looked at including gold for backing of the SDR and was done at the request of China Willem tells me. The second one also looked at using gold in SDR valuation. It was done by Catherine R. Schenk (U. of Glasgow). Neither study endorsed using gold as the sole backing for the SDR in its conclusions (see pp. 28-29 of the first study). The second study mostly noted what impact gold would have on the value of the SDR had it been included in recent years.

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Crisis Watch - Latest Array of Information (June Update - Includes Quotes from Some Sources)

We have concluded here on this blog that really the only thing left to watch for is another major financial crisis so large that it could lead to major monetary system change. Because such an event is impossible to predict from a timing standpoint, I decided to end daily articles here since it could be a long time before another crisis unfolds. 


On the other hand, we have established from many highly credible sources that the conditions for another major crisis do exist and are pretty much present all the time. There are many credible analysts who expect this kind of crisis, but we have only listed many of the warnings issued by both the IMF and the BIS here on this blog. You can see that list here. This is because most people accept these as highly credible sources.


This creates a dilemma for me in trying to serve readers here responsibly. I need to make sure readers are aware of the legitimate warnings and forecasts of credible sources that believe another major crash is either possible or will actually happen. At the same time, I need to make sure that I am not presenting fear based hyperbole if no new major crisis arises any time soon. It's the most difficult issue I struggle with here on this blog.

I have given this problem a lot of thought and my solution is to try and do periodic updates I will title as "Crisis Watch". I will provide a brief summary of all the primary sources of information I follow as to what they are saying regarding the prospects for a new major crisis/crash/collapse. This will hopefully assist readers in a responsible way without me having to make any kind of prediction myself because I freely admit that I have no way to forecast a major event like this unless someone inside the system gives me direct input that they see such a crisis ready to unfold. So far, no one inside the system has done so.


With all that said, here is the rundown for June 1st on what I see from a variety of sources on this issue. This update includes some direct quotes given me from some of the sources listed below. In other cases some sources reviewed and approved my comments on their view.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Sinclair/Bill Holter - I believe both Jim and Bill still firmly believe we will see the kind of major crisis we have talked about here this year. In fact, I think Bill Holter thinks it is actually underway now, but is simply unfolding in waves over time rather than in one big sudden event. Bill Holter released this interview recently (he says we may not make it until October). Bill gave me this direct quote by email to use for this article:

"Larry,  thanks for including us, we both (Jim and Bill) believe we are and have been in crisis mode for quite some time.  Something has already broken in derivatives, we just don't know who it is or where.  We believe the odds favor Deutsche Bank as a culprit, especially now that they are offering 5% to attract money.  This is CRAZINESS ...unless they cannot attract money in any other manner."

Jim Sinclair recently wrote this article which indicates he expects some very dramatic events to take place soon in the gold market. Events like he describes in the gold market would imply there is also turmoil in the overall financial system as well.


Jim Rickards - Jim still believes we will see a major crisis that will lead to big monetary system changes (the SDR replacing the US dollar as global reserve currency). However,Jim does not give a specific time frame for this change to take place. He has said for a couple of years now that it can happen at any time or could take several years, but has indicated he felt it would not be later than the 2018-2020 time frame in some interviews. Jim is always doing a lot of public interviews so I hear him regularly. Basically, Jim says he cannot predict the precise timing for the next crisis so he advises people to prepare as soon as possible because once such a crisis did unfold, it would likely be too late to take any meaningful actions to help weather the storm. Jim says everyone should try to own at least some physical gold as a form of insurance.  I asked Jim to review this write up for this update and he did. He said it looked fine to him as written above.

Nomi Prins - Nomi has much the same view as Jim Rickards. She sees a crisis coming in the future, but does not try to give a specific time frame. She did this interview recently where she talks about why she thinks we are headed for a crisis.

Willem Middelkoop - Willem wrote his book The Big Reset which is all about a coming reset for the global monetary system based on economic turmoil and the need to replace the US dollar as the global reserve currency. Willem is a member of the OMFIF Advisory Board. Here is what Willem had to say about possible timing for a new crisis in a recent twitter post.

"New crisis/crash coming? One day it will, but timing always difficult. Could be next week or 2018/2019. Central Banks will do all to avoid."


Various precious metals advocates - Here we include a number of analysts who regularly do interviews on alternative media sites such as King World News. This group remains virtually unanimous that a huge crisis is coming and most think it will be sooner rather than later. They all advise people to acquire physical precious metals as insurance against such a crisis. In this group would be people like Eric Sprott, John Embry, James Turk, Egon Von Greyerz, Andrew Maguire, David Morgan, Peter Schiff, Mike Maloney and many others. We can assume this group will not change their view and is on constant alert for an event which might trigger the next crisis.

Bo Polny - Bo is a cycles forecaster who uses methods some find questionable to try and predict future market highs and lows. He has a mixed track record having made some remarkably accurate forecasts while also missing on some major forecasts (which to his credit he admits). In this recent interview with Greg Hunter he puts everything on the line by forecasting that we absolutely will see a major financial crisis by this fall which will see the US stock market take an enormous dive downward and will see gold and silver prices sky rocket higher. Bo has missed on similar calls for gold in both 2014 and 2015, but admits that in this interview and makes his case as to why he thinks he will be right this year. I don't know if Bo will be right or wrong, but if he is right, it will be important to start thinking about some kind of backup plan right away. If you are considering acquiring any precious metals as an insurance policy and Bo is right, you only have a few weeks to months left at most. Jim Rickards basically says that same thing, but is not suggesting that he thinks a crisis will emerge this year. This interview is a perfect example of how hard it is to try and decide what to present to readers here. If Bo is off base, his forecast will seem like needlessly worrying people. But if he were to be right, people would ask why no one one gave them the opportunity ahead of time to try and make some preparations. All I can say is I don't know at all, but I do know that having some kind of insurance plan is wiser than assuming nothing could ever happen. That's just common sense. Here is the latest Youtube release from Bo. June update: So far Bo has missed his prediction that gold and silver would start into a massive spike higher in April and May, but he continues to stick to his forecast that the US stock market will crash by this fall. If he misses that forecast, I will drop Bo from this monthly update report.

Donald Trump - Here is a fascinating new forecaster to consider. Trump is proclaiming he thinks we are in a bubble and about to enter a "major recession". He says many of the same things that those predicting a major crisis above are also saying. In his case, this is a major gamble because if we arrive at November 2016 and no major crisis or recession has happened, he will look really off base and will no doubt take a huge political hit with voters who will assume he is unable to assess things properly. On the other hand, if we do get a crisis like Bo Polny (above) is predicting by this fall, Trump will look like a genius and will no doubt reap gigantic political benefit. I believe he would be elected President if such a thing did happen. Based on that, we must assume that Janet Yellen and the Fed have a vested interest in doing everything in their power to avoid such a crisis event happening this year. The very last thing I suspect they would want is Donald Trump as President. He has already announced he favors a full audit of the Fed and would certainly blame the Fed heavily for any major crisis that unfolded this year and of course would take credit for predicting it ahead of time. In this article, The Street.com quotes Trump from an interview in January as follows:

"We're in a bubble," he said. "And, frankly, if there's going to be a bubble popping, I hope they pop before I become president because I don't want to inherit all this stuff. I'd rather it be the day before rather than the day after, I will tell you that."

In an April interview with the Washington Post, Trum reiterated his doomsday view of the economy, suggesting we might be headed for recession. But this time around, he appeared more open to the idea of his being in charge of finding remedies. "I can fix it. I can fix it pretty quickly," he said."



Sources who have connections inside the system - These are sources I cannot name because comments they give me are off the record. I hate to do that, but there is no choice. If you promise someone you will keep a comment off the record, you must honor that for moral and ethical reasons. What I can say here is that no sources like this have indicated to me that they see the kind of crisis we are talking about here happening this year. In fact, all the evidence I have from these kinds of sources indicates that they feel pretty good about the stability of the system right now and don't see any reason to make any kind of major changes to it any time soon. Of course, if a crisis did happen, I'm sure they would change their view on making major changes to try and deal with the crisis. But every indication I have is that if there were a major crisis this year, these sources would be surprised by that. 

Added note for this update: I recently reached out to a very well connected high credibility source (who was on his way to a G20 meeting in China) to get a current update. Here is what that source told me:


"I'm pretty sure there is not a major crisis looming..."

I believe this source would give me a heads up if he saw anything new on this coming our way. I will add that this source has been extremely accurate over the past two years when providing me input. For example he told me he expected the dollar to be strong at at time when many were predicting it to take a sharp drop. He now tells me that any further future volatility in the dollar will probably increase calls for a more stable supranational currency around the world (either the SDR or a digital version of a supranational currency of some kind).

Mainstream media sources (CNBC, Bloomberg, etc) - The overwhelming majority of these kinds of sources are not expecting a major crisis or forecasting one any time soon. If that changes, you probably won't need my blog to know about it. Added note for this update: Bloomberg did run this article noting that defaults are increasing and spreading outside the energy sector. Also, Bloomberg reports here that Japenese PM Abe recently told G7 leaders the world could be at risk for another "Lehman like" major crisis if the correct policies were not implemented. He wants to delay implementing a sales tax increase in Japan.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summing Up: Pros and Cons for a Major Crisis Event

Pros:

- virtually all the sources I follow agree a major crisis is possible at some point in the future unless somehow the current unsustainable debt growth in the US and globally is dealt with. Their time frames vary a lot (anywhere from very soon to a decade from now).

- the IMF and BIS have issued numerous warnings about systemic risks that exist.

- the law of averages - since we know that a major crisis has happened in the past and that they tend to happen in somewhat regular time frames (cycles, etc) it's only common sense to assume we will get another one at some point. The question remains when and how severe.

- the US dollar has shown signs of increasing weakness and the precious metals have sustained strong moves up as well. These are some indicators to keep an eye on. The dollar has stabilized some in the past month but it could be temporary.

Cons:

- we can assume the US Fed and US government will do everything in their power to avoid a major financial crisis during an election year which would help their adversaries make a case against them with the general public.

-while the IMF and BIS have issued many risk warnings, neither is forecasting a crisis event at this time. Both have only expressed concern over slow global GDP growthChristine Lagarde says this:

"She (Lagarde) said the world economy isn't in a crisis but that slow growth risks becoming ingrained as a "new mediocre." She noted the outlook for the next six months has weakened, suggesting the IMF may be revising down its forecasts."

- people have been forecasting a big crisis now every year for the past several years and have been wrong so far. This tends to lead to what I call "crisis fatigue" for the average person who quits listening to such forecasts because nothing major ever seems to happen. Another year of no crisis will just reinforce this feeling.

- mainstream media and mainstream financial analysts continue to see no major crisis coming even though there are some exceptions here and there. 

Conclusion: I will try to do an update like this every so often (on the first of each month normally). If events indicate something significant might  be happening I will try to jump in with an article at that point. Otherwise, this will hopefully provide some useful information to readers without beating this topic to death every day. Overall, there is not much change in this report from the one last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Added notes:  In June I will re-post some key articles on SDRs so the links to those articles will show up on the right side of the blog during the month of May. The articles with Dr. Warren Coats direct comments (given for this blog) will be re-posted every month as they are some of the best information you are going to find on the prospects for the SDR replacing the US dollar anywhere in the world that I know of. Also, I plan to have an article that looks at recent comments by Jim Rickards and Warren Coats on the idea of a gold backed SDR. 

A thank you to Willem Middelkoop for putting a link to this article on his twitter feed here. As an aside, Willem is right that the design of the blog here is pretty basic. That is partially by design since the blog started out as just a hobby and partially because I am an accountant and not an expert in website construction. Initially this blog was really only intended for myself and a few friends and relatives. Over time, it grew into an information site that a lot people have visited that I didn't anticipate. I thought about trying to upgrade the design of the blog, but decided against it because of the time involved and because this blog is really just trying to reach the average person with accurate information so the design was not a priority. Hopefully the content of information here will be helpful enough to visitors to offset the lack of professional design. I hope that does not cause anyone to miss looking at the information archived here. If it does I apologize for overlooking the visual design aspect of the blog because I do understand that it can impact a first impression someone may have. 



Here are the links I will repost sometime in June:

SDR - An Emerging Global Currency (Video)

Followup - Dr. Coats Answers a readers questions

Why Dr. Coats thinks the world needs the SDR with a "hard anchor"

New Article Proposes Using SDR to "Finance Global Reflation"

Claudio Borio (BIS) Talks about SDRs

List of all articles here on SDR's