Related topics: Treasurys, Hewlett-Packard, China, gold, Bill Fleckenstein
Last weekend's Wall Street Journal carried an interview with Stan Druckenmiller, a former fund manager for billionaire George Soros, which began: "A financial crisis is surely going to happen as big or bigger than the one we had in 2008 if we continue to behave the way we're behaving."
Druckenmiller is referring to the ultimate funding crisis we are heading for -- in which the dollar plummets, Treasury bond yields leap higher, or both -- something I have been concerned about for some time.
He believes that the current debt-ceiling gymnastics could be a catalyst to get Congress to tackle entitlement spending (which is clearly an out-of-control train barreling toward us), thereby potentially avoiding a crisis. I am a little surprised he is that optimistic.
As the article points out, in 1995 the debt ceiling (i.e., the level above which the debt is not supposed to climb) was $5 trillion; it is now almost $15 trillion. It was about $1 trillion in 1981. My point in bringing that up is that I find the concept of a "ceiling" to be useless, as it has not stopped the national debt from exploding fifteenfold in 30 years.
A-flop-olis now?
However, I agree with Druckenmiller when he says, "We are either going to solve (our spending and debt imbalances) or we are going to find ourselves being Greece somewhere down the road."
Bill Fleckenstein
We won't ever be as bad off as Greece, of course, because we have a printing press and Greece doesn't. (Also, its spending and debt are much further out of control, which is why it will eventually either have to restructure or leave the European Monetary Union.)
Druckenmiller also made an interesting point about Treasury trading when he said that it was not a free market: "The (bond) market isn't saying anything about the future. It is saying there's a phony buyer of $19 billion in Treasurys each week." Thus, those who feel sanguine about the future direction of inflation because the bond market has not priced in higher rates (yet) might want to rethink their logic.
He goes on to point out that governments usually take action only after their "bond market blows up." And of course that is essentially the course we are on. The road ahead, as I see it, is that we will have a funding crisis and only then will we deal with the fact that, unfortunately, we cannot afford the promises we have made.
I do not believe the debt ceiling is capable of forcing those kinds of hard decisions, as it never has before. In any event, we will soon know whether Druckenmiller's view is correct. One thing is for sure, though: Druckenmiller didn't get all those zeroes behind his net worth by being a dummy.
Triple threat
Last week provided yet another example of the antipathy currently directed toward big-cap tech. Hewlett-Packard (HPQ, news) lost 8% after reporting results on May 17 that were deemed to be slightly below expectations, at least with regard to the company's outlook for the rest of the year.
HP is another tech stock that is not terribly expensive, as it expects to earn $5 a share and is trading around $36. In addition to its results, somehow an internal memo was leaked the previous day (after the close) that stated the company's head-count projection was "unaffordable." The obvious implication is that HP won't be undertaking a hiring spree any time soon, and that perhaps layoffs could be on the horizon.
The reason that is significant has more to do with the overall economy than it does with HP. Even though large-cap tech companies get no respect in the market, as many of them trade at a low eight to 10 times earnings, most -- including HP -- are doing reasonably well in their businesses. Thus, if they are unable to hire new people and are instead forced to cut personnel, doing so will only add pressure to a somewhat soggy economic outlook.
Additionally, the real-estate market looks to me like it is weakening again, and if stocks decide they want to have a decent correction, then we would have the stock market, real estate, and the jobs picture all in sync indicating weakness.
That would put immense pressure on Ben Bernanke and the Fed to rustle up QE3, a third round of quantitative easing. Obviously, that is not an idea that is in play today, but should these trends continue, those drumbeats will almost certainly start.
Also in line with that idea, the Economic Cycle Research Institute, noted that its long-term leading indicator -- which has quite a good track record -- had turned negative. So that is yet another bit of fuel for the fire to which the Fed's feet are liable to be held.
We can dig where they're coming from
While so many of our political and economic institutions here in the U.S. seem trapped by their own inertia and hubris, elsewhere in the world there are still signs of intelligent life. This week, for example, on May 17, revealed what to me was a very interesting development when Citic Group, China's biggest state-owned investment company, along with the China Development Bank and Long March Capital Group, decided to bid about $500 million for Gold One, an Australia-based mining company whose primary assets are in South Africa.
The reason I think this is important is because I have long felt that at some point China might take some of its $3 trillion worth of wampum and decide to buy the world's creators of the world's oldest monetary brand (gold), i.e., gold miners.
I know that might sound laughable, but before currency became nothing but paper it used to be backed by gold. So if you were to own the world's miners you would own the world's ability to create money. Thus, for the Chinese to part with a few hundred billion of its paper "wealth" -- which is all it would take to buy up the lion's share of the major gold miners -- to own the world's money creation vehicle makes perfect sense to me.
Granted, if the Chinese tip their hand, the price of those assets would go up, but nonetheless the strategy is a good one. Whether this is a one-off idea or they are just testing the waters, I have no way to know. But it is definitely worth keeping an eye on.
At the time of publication, Bill Fleckenstein owned gold.
This column is a synopsis of Bill Fleckenstein's daily column on his website, FleckensteinCapital.com, which he's been writing on the Internet since 1996. Click here to find Fleckenstein's most recent articles.
