• HOME
  • About the contributor
  • Articles (RSS)
Subscribe to Newsletter
RECENT ARTICLES
  • The Microeconomics of Inflation (or how I know this ends in tears)
  • Another attempt in the history of failed manipulations
  • A short history of currency swaps
  • Why the Fed’s buy & hold (no sales) exit is not feasible
  • From Shirakawa to Kuroda: The regime change explained
  • Modern Monetary Theory is the winner…at least for now
  • The template that nobody is watching
  • Why Mr. Dijsselbloem is right and Cyprus is a template for the Euro zone
  • Why Cyprus 2013 is worse than the KreditAnstalt (1931) and Argentina 2001 crises
  • Gold manipulation, Part 3: “The systemic risk of gold manipulation”

ARTICLES CALENDAR
January 2010
S M T W T F S
« Dec   Feb »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

ARTICLES CATEGORIES
  • Letter Articles

ARCHIVES
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009


Search this Blog

Archive of January 6th, 2010

Contemporary comments

Published on January 6th 2010

Please, click here to read this article in pdf format: january-6-20091 In my view, the main factor driving markets yesterday continued to be the concern on the housing sector. The release of the month-over-month Pending Home sales data at -16% vs. a -2% expected, confirmed investors’ fear that the housing sector is lagging vs. other recovery [...]

Please, click here to read this article in pdf format: january-6-20091

In my view, the main factor driving markets yesterday continued to be the concern on the housing sector. The release of the month-over-month Pending Home sales data at -16% vs. a -2% expected, confirmed investors’ fear that the housing sector is lagging vs. other recovery stories. This is directly connected to my earlier comments this week on the Treasury’s decision to support GSE debt indirectly, through the Preferred Stock Purchase Program (see www.sibileau.com/martin/2010/01/04 and www.sibileau.com/martin/2010/01/05 ).

Having said this, you can see why range-bound trading in almost every major market took place yesterday. At the same time and consistent with the amount of speeches given by US monetary authorities this week, there is a lot of media attention on the timing and form of exit strategies. On the latter, I notice increased interest in the alternative of bond sales by the Fed. If you have been following these letters, you may remember that I went on record on November 24th and 26th with a new thesis precisely on this point (refer: “Introducing Thesis No. 3”, www.sibileau.com/martin/2009/11/24; and www.sibileau.com/martin/2009/11/26). At the time, I wrote it didn’t make sense to target a level of reserves consistent with what we had pre-crisis, in disagreement with the mainstream opinion. It seems this view may be getting more support.
Thus, there appears to be an increasing crowd favoring asset sales by the Fed. In an online forum, I made two points yesterday on the rationale for this, which I reproduce below:

- Historical:
Bond sales are consistent with what Keynes had in mind, on how to get out of a mess like the one we’re in. He discussed this in Chapter 13, of his “General Theory …”. In 1936, Keynes wrote: “…when output has increased and prices have risen, the effect of this on liquidity-preference will be to increase the quantity of money necessary to maintain a given rate of interest…”. I am convinced that Bernanke has been following Keynes since this whole thing began. If I am right, Bernanke then should be seeking to manage the quantity of money, necessary to maintain the status quo… Keynes believed in managing a level of liquidity to determine rates, and not the opposite. How do you manage money, which is the liabilities of central banks? By managing the other side of the balance sheet: Its assets. Bond sales are therefore the way to go.

- Analytical
Quantitative easing policies are very disruptive to an economic system, because they distort relative prices. Therefore, if central banks want to reverse the distortions they produced in the markets (for instance the Agencies’ debt basis), the simplest way is to unwind the initial trades that originally created these distortions. Bond sales, again, are the way to go. When the variable is “quantities”, the model adjusts via prices. I always, always, always, prefer markets rather than governments to figure out prices (i.e. market clearing rate of interest).

Finally, there is also another big debate on how to prevent financial crisis going forward. This is a topic for another day. In the meantime, let me say that financial crisis will not be prevented as long as we have central banks. It’s that simple.

Financial crisis can only be prevented under four necessary conditions: a) A free banking system (= no central banks and no legal tender); b) A central clearinghouse for the issuance of money (notes). A free banking system without a clearinghouse, where banks compete for the seignioriage (proposed by many authors within the Austrian school) is also a flawed system; c)  a commodity-based unit of account (i.e. gold oz.); and d) free and flexible exchange rate system. Gold convertibility under a Conversion Agency (as proposed by Ludwig Von Mises on Part IV, Ch. III, p. 449 of his “The Theory of Money and Credit”, Yale, 1953) is a quick and sure way to utter failure, in my view.

Like Fermat, I also have discovered a “truly marvelous” proof of this proposition, which this letter is too narrow to contain…
Martin Sibileau

Twitt

117 Comments »

  • The comments expressed in this website and daily letters are my own personal opinions only and do not necessarily reflect the positions or opinions of my employer or its affiliates.
  • All comments are based upon my current knowledge and my own personal experiences. You should conduct independent research to verify the validity of any statements made in this website before basing any decisions upon those statements. In addition, any views or opinions expressed by visitors to this website are theirs and do not necessarily reflect mine.
  • The information contained herein is not necessarily complete and its accuracy is not guaranteed. If you are receiving this communication in error, please notify me immediately by electronic mail (martin@sibileau.com) or telephone at 647-999-2055.
  • My comments provide general information only. Neither the information nor any opinion expressed constitutes a solicitation, an offer or an invitation to make an offer, to buy or sell any securities or other financial instrument or any derivative related to such securities or instruments (e.g., options, futures, warrants, and contracts for differences).
  • My comments are not intended to provide personal investment advice and they do not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation and the particular needs of any specific person.
All rights reserved. A view from the Trenches is proudly powered by WordPress. Wordpress theme designed and coded by SibileauLang