It’s Hitting The Fan, No Longer A 6 Sigma Event?

When a headline like this appears in the Washington Post it is probably is no longer a 6 Sigma event, i.e, the odds of it happening are 500 million to 1.

President Pelosi

Recall the political scenario we laid out in May 2017,

Contemplate this 6 sigma scenario:

Bad news for Trump continues to leak out and staffers and acquaintances are indicted all through the rest of 2017 and 2018.   The Democrats take the House and Senate in a landslide in November 2018.

Impeachment charges are brought both against President Trump and Vice President Pence, say, as a co-conspirator on obstruction of justice charges in the firing of James Comey.

It’s 2019 and the Dems control the House and the Senate with comfortable majorities.

The House impeaches the President and Vice President.   The Senate convicts both.

Who is next in line to assume the Presidency?   The Speaker of the House,  Nancy Pelosi?  – Global Macro Monitor, May 18, 2017

Maybe the scenario is now a 4 Sigma event, or 16k to 1 odds.

This new scandal is unraveling quickly and has now sucked in Secretary of State Pompeo, who is 4th in the line of presidential succession.

Nothing but crickets from Vice President Pence since the news of the Ukraine scandal broke and after what appeared to be President Trump throwing him under the bus.

 

President Pelosi_2

Civil War

If, now the 4 Sigma event, does seem to be even remotely close to becoming The Event, it’s time to fear the American Street, folks.

We wonder who are the 3 percent of American adults who own a collective 133m firearms – half of America’s total gun stock?   We do have our suspicions.

Who knows what he is thinking, but POTUS does seem to be already dog-whistling.

President Pelosi_3

At best, this is incredibly irresponsible and totally reckless, and could even be grounds for impeachment.

One Of Our 2019 Tail Events

In early January we posted,  2019’s Five Most Mispriced Tail Events.   The top of the list?

  1. Trump Leaves Office By Year-End
    There is only one thing Trump likes more than power – money.  As his legal troubles grow exponentially in 2019, the president has an epiphany that he could lose all his wealth.  He cuts a Spiro Agnew-like deal and resigns from office in return for leniency.   The markets rally into the announcement but Trump doesn’t go easy and dog whistles to his base as he hits the exit.  The U.S. experiences a period of political and social instability.   Stocks sell-off hard.

Does anyone have a clue how fragile, unstable, and how thin the ice just might be?

Do you think any of this is priced?  If feels like things are about to get nonlinear.

Seat Belts_Mar24

 

Posted in Impeachment, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

America’s Perilous Path Of Wealth Distribution

Summary

  • We illustrate the stark contrast in the growth of household wealth between the different percentile groups since Q1 2000
  • The top 1% of households now hold more wealth than the bottom 90%
  • The aggregate nominal wealth of the bottom 50% of households has fallen by almost 10 percent since 2000, from 3.4 percent of total household wealth to just 1.3 percent
  • The share of the top 1% is now over 31 percent and has grown by over 165 percent since Q1 2000
  • The average wealth per household of the bottom 50% has declined 25 percent in nominal terms and 50 percent in real purchasing power compared to the 1%’s increase of 118 percent and 50 percent, respectively
  • The widening wealth gap is a major factor in the rise of populism in the U.S. and the debate over a wealth tax will be a central focus of the 2020 presidential election
  • Asset inflation resulting from quantitative easing (QE) has contributed to the widening wealth gap
  • Long pitchforks and water cannons

Wealth Tax Talk

We hear a lot these days about wealth taxes.   A new wealth tax on the upper echelons of the top 1% of wealthiest households will likely be at the center of the 2020 presidential campaign.

This kind of rhetoric and these ideas just don’t happen in a vacuum and are gaining political momentum.  Our analysis will illustrate how it is based and moored in the two-decade-long change in the country’s distribution of wealth.

The prediction markets now give Elizabeth Warren a 50 percent probability of winning the Democratic nomination compared to only 21 percent for Joe Biden.

Predict_Dem_Nom

Here is a little snippet of Elizabeth Warren’s plan for a wealth tax from her campaign website.

 ..an Ultra-Millionaire Tax on America’s 75,000 richest families to produce trillions that can be used to build an economy that works for everyone — elizabethwarren.com

During the next week, we will present a series of posts analyzing wealth distribution in the United States, which seems to have reached a political tipping point.  The top 1% of American households now have more wealth than the bottom 90% compared to 79 percent of the bottom 90% in Q1 2000.

In this post, we briefly present some data and charts on the growing wealth inequality between the top 1% and the bottom 50% of U.S. households.

Changes In Wealth For Average Household 

Just a few caveats before looking at the following charts.

First, see our post, Be Skeptics Of Macro Data In The Two-Speed Economy, warning about looking at averages when data distributions are so skewed.   This is illustrated in the bible of wealth distribution, the Fed’s Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF),  

Survery of Consumer Finances

Note the significant differences between the average and median data points,  which is the result of the top-heavy distribution of wealth in the U.S. where 70 percent of household wealth is now held by the top 10%,  pulling up and distorting the average.

Second,  our estimate of the number of households, which we have sourced from the Census Bureau and extrapolated for the current year.  There is an ongoing debate about what constitutes a household and a family.   Nevertheless, we are very confident our estimates in the following two charts are very good and close approximations of the data that will be eventually published in the next SCF, which should be out in a year or two.

The Raw Data

The following table illustrates the aggregate wealth data from the Fed’s new Distributional Financial Accounts (DFA).  Note we use the terms “wealth” and “net worth” interchangeably.

Wealth_Table_1

 

Though the DFA time series begins in 1989, we use Q1 2000 as our base year not only because it represents the beginning of the new Millenium but it was also the quarter of peak aggregate nominal wealth for the bottom 50% of households.

Key Takeaway

The most stunning takeaway, at least for us, from the table is that the nominal aggregate wealth of the bottom 50% has declined, underscore fallen in nominal terms, over the past 19 years.   That is almost a 10 percent decline while, at the same time, the wealth of the top 1% has increased by 166 percent.   The share of the total household wealth of the bottom 50% has dropped from a mere 3.4 percent in 2000 to 1.3 percent in Q1 2019.

The aggregate wealth of the top 1% relative to the bottom 50% has increased from a factor of 8.5 to 24.6 from Q1 2000 to Q1 2019.  Stunning and politically dangerous.

The data are even starker when taking into account that household formation has grown by over 20 percent since the beginning of 2000.

Nominal Average Wealth/Net Worth Per Household

HHNW_Current

Real Average Wealth/Net Worth Per Household

HHNW_Real

Go no further to understand America’s rising populism and growing political conflict than the above two charts.  It also illustrates the country’s two-speed economy and the sharp contrast of the economic well being of the top percentile groups and the bottom 50% of U.S. households.

Real-World Example Of Wealth Decimation

It is hard to comprehend the decimation in purchasing power of the wealth of the average household on the other side of middle from 2000 to 2019 but let us help with a simple real-life example.

Wealth_Table_2

In 2000, the average wealth per household of the bottom 50%, assuming a family of four, could purchase 163 day passes at Disneyland.  In 2019, however, given the decline in nominal wealth and the increase in Disneyland ticket prices, which have outpaced core CPI by more than 5x, fell to just 36 days.

Official Inflation Data Flawed

Just an aside, the relative increase in Disney tickets illustrates why we are so skeptical of and think the official inflation data calculated by the government underestimates real-world price increases, which are what truly matter with respect to a consumer’s real purchasing power.

Yes, we do understand relative price changes and that Samsung large screen televisions are much less expensive than they were in 2000.

Another Data Caveat 

One should not make the mistake of viewing the above comparisons as a panel study.  That is there is no doubt that some households were in the bottom 50% in 2000 are now in the top 1%, and vice versa.

In addition,  the data are averaged with a range from a deeply negative net worth for the lowest percentiles of the bottom 50% to around $100k of the top percentile of the bottom 50%.   Ditto for the top 1% where a few of the highest percentile households hold over $100 billion in wealth and the lowest of the top 1%, i.e., the 99th percentile of all U.S. households, is just over $10 million.

Keep that in perspective, folks, during your meditation on the data.

Why The Wealth Divergence?

One, or the major factor of the wealth divergence is that the returns earned on assets such as stocks, bonds, and equity in private businesses have greatly exceeded the growth of wages, which have been nothing short been dismal over the past 20 years.  The several rounds of quantitative easing (QE) and the subsequent asset inflation have greatly contributed to the problem, increasing the support for some kind of a People’s QE.

We also illustrated in an earlier post how debt-laden the bottom 50% is relative to other percentile groups.

Debt_Aseet Ratio

Upshot

So, there you have it, folks.

It doesn’t take a Ph.D. economist or political scientist to understand what, we believe, is the biggest problem in today’s political economy.  Just contemplate and study the few charts and data points above.

It will certainly be one of the main drivers of the 2020 presidential election and the winner will most likely be the candidate who convinces the majority of the electoral college or voters in the swing states, that he/she can best fix the problem or, more darker, is better at exploiting the rage against it.  Yikes!

Either way, we suspect the 2020 campaign will be very ugly.

The concept of fairness in the distribution of resources is not just political but the literature increasingly shows is more innate.   The perception of fairness also triggers more cooperation and helps an economy and society become more efficient  and run more smoothly.

See our June post, The Innate Angst Of Inequality, or take a few minutes to view the video in the Appendix at the bottom of this post.

Can Markets Handle A Hard-Left Turn?

We are not so sure asset markets can handle and sustain a hard-left political turn.  We are fairly certain, however, the current trajectory of the distribution of household wealth is not politically sustainable.

We are hoping for new policies that focus more on equitable growth, pulling the lower middle and bottom 50% of households up to close the wealth gap rather a radical redistribution of wealth program.  The quickest but ugliest path to close the wealth gap is for both public and private equity markets to take, say, a 50 percent hit, which will end up hurting the most vulnerable.

I recall a conversation with one of my lefty political science professors during the dot.com crash.  I asked if he was happy that the wealth gap between the richest man in the world at the time, Bill Gates, and the poorest person (maybe it was me) was cut in half with the crash of the Nasdaq.  He responded, “no, let’s not do it that way.”  Good for him.

Wealth Tax As An Investment In Social Stability

Nevertheless, some sort of redistribution of wealth from the uber-wealthy is inevitable, in our opinion.  After all, the top of the top 1% have taken down an extraordinarily disproportionate share of the increase in total household wealth since 2000.  They should view some sort of a wealth tax as an investment in the country’s social infrastructure and political stability in order to protect the totality of their asset holdings.

Whatever the scenario, the markets are vulnerable and to extract ourselves from this mess it is going to take some very effective and competent leadership with lots of nuance and finesse.  Apollo 13 like leadership and finesse.

…to return the [Apollo 13] astronauts safely, a new return trajectory had to be calculated and that is where his education in physics, as well as his experience at NASA, came into play. Calculating that return trajectory was like threading a needle from 70 feet away, he said. “We had to be accurate.”

“Apollo 13 was a test of real leadership and how we took a potential tragedy and turned it into a success,” he said. “All of us had a conviction to ride Apollo 13 to the end. We never thought we couldn’t do it.’ — Cherokee Phoenix

Stay tuned for more data posts.   Long pitchforks and water cannons, for now.

Running Out Of Free Lunches

We are almost out of free lunches, folks, and will be posting only sporadically unless your support increases.   Donate whatever you think is fair by clicking on the PayPal button just below the Twitter and search icons on the upper right-hand side of the blog.  You do not need a PayPal account and can use almost any credit card.

Don’t be a free rider.  Thanks, so much.

free rider

 

Appendix

Posted in Economics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 37 Comments

The Coming Political Oktoberfest

So we missed by a week or two.

Coming “Summer Political Discontent?”

There will be some political instability into a second referendum vote as the Brexiteers take to the street.  Depending on how things shape up with President Trump’s legal troubles,  we may be moving into a transatlantic  “summer of discontent,” where the U.K. and U.S. experience a bout of political and social instability.  –  GMM, March 13, 2019

 

Economist

 

Buckle up for the coming Political Oktoberfest on both sides of the pond.  Impeachment for Twitterdum and a vote of no confidence for Twaddledee and an early election on the docket.

The prediction markets now put the probability of impeachment at 70 percent and no BREXIT by November 1 at 78 percent.

Bad Things Happen During Impeachments

Noted in our analysis are the two big “coincidences” of bad things concurrently occurring at tipping points during the two impeachment proceedings.   The Russian default on the same day President Clinton confessed to the grand jury and the OPEC oil embargo during the same week of Watergate’s Saturday Night Massacre.   Coincidences?

Bad things tend to happen in the world when the U.S. administration is distracted and looks weakened by political scandal.  And, believe us, there is a legion of bad things out there just waiting to happen, all of which are stock market negative. — GMM,  May 2017

Seat Belts_Mar24

Moreover,  see How Presidential Scandal Endangers Global Stability

We just found this tidbit of history from Politico of how during the Watergate scandal the Nixon administration was melting down and the President retreated to self-medication,

The Nixon administration began disintegrating—the president unable to play his role as the leader of the nation and the free world—at 7:55 p.m. on October 11, 1973.

The newly appointed secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, picked up his telephone. His trusted aide at the National Security Council, Brent Scowcroft, was on the line from the White House. The Arab-Israeli war of 1973 was in its fifth day, escalating toward a global crisis and a potential nuclear conflict.

SCOWCROFT: The switchboard just got a call from 10 Downing Street to inquire whether the president would be available for a call within 30 minutes from the prime minister. The subject would be the Middle East.

KISSINGER: Can we tell them no? When I talked to the president he was loaded.

President Richard Nixon—ravaged by more than four years of war in Vietnam, 15 months of Watergate investigations and countless nights of intense insomnia—was incapacitated.  – Politico

Wow!  POTUS was hammered as the world spiraled toward nuclear conflict and incapable of taking “the call.”

This further confirms our suspicions that domestic political scandals, such as Watergate, distorts and weakens the global perception — and maybe not just perception — of U.S. leadership in the world.   And contributed, at least, partially,  to the 1973 Yom Kippur War and subsequent economic crisis caused by the related OPEC embargo.

It was only nine days later after the above account by Politico the Saturday Night Massacre took place.

If past is prologue,  as Trumpgate thickens we suspect the world may become more unstable.

…Thank goodness President Trump doesn’t drink,  but he does seem to find release — i.e., self-medicate — through his Twitter account.   And recent history shows that one “bad” tweet can do more damage and be more self-destructive to a Presidency than, say,  five martinis.   Gulp!  — GMM, May 2017

 

Posted in Brexit, Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

What Are They Thinking?

Stocks are reeling from the following headline.

Capital Flows

The White House is weighing some curbs on U.S. investments in China, a source familiar with the matter told CNBC. This discussion includes possibly blocking all U.S. financial investments in Chinese companies, the source said.

It’s in the preliminary stages and nothing has been decided, the source said. There’s also no time frame for their implementation, the source added.  – CNBC

We don’t think the U.S. is in a strong position to start a war on capital flows given its very weak net international investment position (NIIP), which now exceeds a negative $10 trillion dollars.  Capital inflows help keep U.S. asset markets afloat and finance budget deficits.

Net International Investment Poistion 

The difference between a country’s external financial assets and liabilities is its net international investment position (NIIP).  A country’s external debt includes both its government debt and private debt, and similarly its public and privately held (by its legal residents) external assets are also taken into account when calculating its NIIP. Note that commodities, as well as currencies tend to follow cyclical patterns, whereby they undergo significant valuation changes, of which is reflected in NIIP.

A country’s international investment position (IIP) is a financial statement setting out the value and composition of that country’s external financial assets and liabilities. A positive NIIP value indicates a nation is a creditor nation, while a negative value indicates it is a debtor nation.  – Wikipedia

Slouching Toward Socialism 

The trade war, the political manipulation of imports and exports, and the threat of managing capital flows are just too much of a slouch toward socialism, in our book.

NIIP

Do you think the SEC has the same concern of protecting the public from overhyped and overvalued IPOs that owners dump on the public?  Think loss-making Uber, which is down 30 percent since its IPO and WeWork, almost.    Just askin’.

Running Out Of Free Lunches

We are almost out of free lunches, folks, and will be posting only sporadically unless your support increases.   Donate whatever you think is fair by clicking on the PayPal button just below the Twitter and search icons on the upper right-hand side of the blog.  You do not need a PayPal account and can use almost any credit card.

Don’t be a free rider.  Thanks, so much.

free rider

 

Posted in Capital Flows, China, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Turmoil In The Money Markets & Financing Burgeoning Budget Deficits

Sit up and listen, folks.  We may be in the midst of a Black Swan event.

Nobody knows for certain what is creating the turmoil in the repo and money markets but we suspect much of it has to do with the increase of the trillion-dollar-plus budget deficits during an economic expansion, i.e., pro-cyclical budget deficits, which have been very rare.   We have been pounding this theme over the past month.  See our last post here.

If you want some context and a comprehensive understanding of the changing dynamics of financing the budget deficit and the structure of the Treasury market, go to our tome,  The Gathering Storm In The Treasury Market.   That piece was posted last September, just before the spike in the 10-year Treasury yield, which caused the Q4 stock market crash.

The upshot of the post was that the technical factors of the Treasury market, supply and demand, are rapidly changing and the natural path of real interest rates are higher, and there are consequences to financial repression.   We underestimated just how sensitive global markets were to an even 50 bps increase in long-term bond yields but we did hedge ourselves,

All bets off given a geopolitical shock — we are concerned how quickly U.S.-China relations are moving south;  a collapse in stock prices,  or a sharp slowdown in economic activity.   Haven flows will likely swamp the structural factors pressuring yields higher.  – GMM, August 24, 2018

So, here we are, one year later with yields 150 bps lower but the Treasury still is in need of $1 trillion in annual financing.  We believe the distortions are now showing up in the money markets as interest rates cannot move higher to their steady-state normal equilibrium levels because markets perceive there is too much debt in the global financial system.

If you squeeze a balloon, the pressure and bulge shows up elsewhere.  Classic Le Chatelier’s principle

The Bloomie opinion page also seems to get it.

Bloomie_Repo_1

I’d offer another angle that’s largely flown under the radar: The chaos in repo markets was a long time coming given the widening U.S. budget deficits and the lenders that are financing that shortfall.

Deficits, while nothing new, add up over time. And while they declined each year from 2011 through 2015, both overall and as a percentage of gross domestic product, the gap has widened again under President Donald Trump. Put it all together, and the amount of U.S. Treasury securities outstanding has roughly tripled since the financial crisis:

This growth was mostly under control in the years after the financial crisis because the Fed had been buying up large chunks of the Treasury market through its quantitative easing programs. But it was gradually reducing the size of its balance sheet from late 2017 until July, precisely at the same time that the Treasury Department was increasing the size of its monthly auctions to finance the bigger budget shortfalls. All told, the Fed now holds about $2.1 trillion of Treasuries, down from almost $2.5 trillion previously:  – Bloomberg

 

Central Banks Financing U.S. Budget Deficit

Since around 2000, when the Federal budget was in surplus, the U.S. government has leaned heavily on foreign central banks and then the Fed post-GFC to plug it growing fiscal gap.  The Fed cannot finance the government directly by participating in the monthly auctions (unless rolling over SOMA portfolio) but do so indirectly in their secondary market purchases either through QE, and,  now we argue through open market operations OMO, which, we suspect,  will soon morph into POMO and another permanent round of QE.   This is now taking place when the annualized core CPI over the past three months is running at 3.4 percent. 

Note, at the end of July, the Fed and foreign central banks held almost 50 percent of all marketable Treasury notes and bonds outstanding.  That is just stunning.

 

Treasury_Distortion_1

 

The central bank financing of the U.S. government has freed up funds and liquidity to power other asset markets and capital spending, or buybacks.

Central Banks Pulling Back

The Fed and the big central banks that matter and are scaleable – China and Japan – have pulled back their purchases of Treasuries at the same time interest rates have fallen way below, what we believe is their equilibrium technical level to clear the market.  Think, rent control.

Bloomie_Repo_2

Source: Bloomberg

Even the narrative that foreigners are chasing Treasuries for yield doesn’t seem to be backed up by data — at least the 10-year note —  from the recent monthly auctions. As of the issuance date on August 15th, foreigners were allotted just 13.6 percent on average over the past three auctions.

In fact, the August 15th (August 7 auction date) issuance allotted only 12.02 percent to foreigners and international buyers, the lowest since September 2016.

Bloomie_Repo_4

Bad Timing

Bad timing as the Treasury, who had been forced to finance its budget shortfall prior to  August by running down its balances at the Fed and by other means due to the debt ceiling, borrowed almost $400 billion from the public in August.  That may, underscore may, have shocked the financial system.   Kind of like the pressure building up on a beachball, which is held underwater then suddenly released.

The Treasury is pretty good at managing its borrowing to maintain market stability and issued around $200 billion of $386 billion in the form of nonmarketable General Account Series debt to the public.  These Treasuries are usually issued to intragovernmental agencies – i,e, nonpublic — such as the Social Security trust funds

 

Bloomie_Repo_6

 

Who took down the $200 billion of GAS?  We suspect it is a fudge factor account and we have reached out to Treasury trying to nail it down.  Will let you know as soon as we find the answer.

 

Repo_Montly Borrowings

Banks Getting Stuffed

Moreover,  it does seem banks, including primary dealers,  are choking on Treasury securities.

So if it’s not the Fed, it’s not China and it’s not Japan, where are all these Treasuries going?

U.S. commercial banks are certainly a place to start looking. They’ve done their part since the financial crisis, but especially lately, with holdings of Treasuries and agency securities climbing to almost $3 trillion as of Sept. 11:

Bloomie_Repo_3

Primary dealers, a select subset of banks that are obligated to bid at Treasury auctions, were saddled earlier this year with the most Treasuries ever — an outright position of almost $300 billion. Even now, their holdings are more than double what they were a year ago as they’re required to take down larger pieces of the U.S. government’s debt sales. 

There are simply too many bonds (or, in the language of the repo market, “collateral”) sloshing around in the financial system and not enough cash on the other side of the trade. America’s budget deficits are being financed domestically and leading to a relentless drain on reserves – Bloomberg

So there you have it, folks, it’s not rocket science.

Too much supply in all the wrong places and not enough demand from all the right places.  If rates were allowed to go to their natural equilibrium level, demand for Treasuries would increase from natural buyers and I seriously doubt the money market markets would be seizing up.  But, as we know from Q4 2018, interest rates can’t go up because the stock and asset markets will and did crash.

The End Game

We have been concerned for quite some time about the financing of big budget deficits, and we mean big – the deficit from October to August 2019 is equivalent to the combined GDPs of Austria, Ireland, and the Czech Republic, especially given the distortion of global interest rates,

A question has been nagging us for some time.  If the current sovereign yields are repressed and fake, many of which are negative, can the borrowers issue any significant amount of new debt at these current yields?   Especially to long-term holders?

We are just thinking out loud here but our priors are that of the Big Three — U.S., Germany, and Japan — which have relatively transparent markets as opposed to China,  the U.S. is the only government that needs to issue a significant supply of debt and bonds into the market.  – GMM,  Aug 6th

It doesn’t surprise us one bit the turmoil taking place in the money market though we thought the pressure would show up more in the monthly auctions.  It could be the banks are being stuffed to window dress the auctions.   Maybe, we don’t know.

We will find out soon as the Treasury will have to ramp up its net new issuance after their creative cash flow management during this year’s debt ceiling negotiations.   We seriously doubt they can without another round of quantitative easing, and that monetization just may be the beginning of the end of dollar hegemony and set us on the happy road to higher inflation, which everyone seems to be wishing for.  Not us, by the way  –  GMM, August 6th 

If we are right, the turmoil in the money markets is more of a structural problem, which may, periodically,  calm down depending on the matching of public and sector cash flows or the distortions may show up elsewhere and in other markets.

It does seem, however, the day of reckoning has or is coming soon on the deficit/debt-bomb so many have been warning about for so long.  Of course, they will say  nobody saw it coming.

The only real political choice will be to monetize the deficits, which will only significantly increase economic and financial distortions, further expanding the minefield of potential Black Swans.

 

Posted in Bonds, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 3 Comments

What the company of the future will look like | FT


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

My 6 Sigma Political Scenario Now Trending On Twitter

I took so much incoming for this part of a post (reposted yesterday) I wrote back in May 2017.  People would look at me as I was crazy when I laid out the unlikely scenario, which, I admit, was written mainly for intellectual entertainment for political junkies.

It won’t happen but it’s hard to believe it is now trending on Twitter after President Trump appeared to throw Mike Pence under the bus today, which led to the following tweet by Harvard Law Prof, Lawrence Tribe.

Twittter

The 6 Sigma Event:  President Pelosi in 2019

Finally,   you know we like to think outside the box here at the Global Macro Monitor and live in the fat tails.

Contemplate this 6 sigma scenario:

Bad news for Trump continues to leak out and staffers and acquaintances are indicted all through the rest of 2017 and 2018.   The Democrats take the House and Senate in a landslide in November 2018.

Impeachment charges are brought both against President Trump and Vice President Pence, say, as a co-conspirator on obstruction of justice charges in the firing of James Comey.

It’s 2019 and the Dems control the House and the Senate with comfortable majorities.

The House impeaches the President and Vice President.   The Senate convicts both.

Who is next in line to assume the Presidency?   The Speaker of the House,  Nancy Pelosi?

The probability?  Six sigma or about 2 * 10^-9 or two in a billion.  Most likely,  even much, much lower. 

Hey,  but good stuff for a political thriller or fodder for the House of Cards,  no?  – GMM,  May 18, 2017

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

The Mooch On Impeachment

The Mooch says Republican Senators “hate Trump’s guts” and will turn on him.

 

 

Watch this space.  It’s been in rampopotamus mode over the past week.

Trump_Senate

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Viva la Oxford Comma!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Beware Shorting Impeachments

Reposting a piece from a few years back to provide some market perspective on today’s news.  There are a confluence of events, not just political instability, of why we believe stocks are headed lower, including valuations and the shifting of geopolitical and economic tectonic plates.

Posted on

We’ve analyzed the behavior of the S&P500 during the Watergate impeachment hearings and the Clinton impeachment.  If you’re shorting risk markets solely based on speculation that President Trump may be impeached, maybe you should think again.

Let’s first look at the Clinton impeachment S&P500.   The market never seemed to take the Clinton impeachment seriously and was never a threat to the stock market.

Then we’ll analyze the more complicated Watergate scandal, which many consider the main culprit of the 1973/74 bear market, a 50 percent decline in S&P500 from January 11, 1973 to October 3, 1974.

Finally,  we will take a look at Trumpgate and introduce you to our newest political Six Sigma political thriller.

Clinton Impeachment
The rumors of the Clinton-Lewinsky affair broke January 19, 1998, on the Drudge Report, which was a market holiday.  Recall U.S. stocks were in a rip-roaring bull market and massive bubble that saw the Dow rise 253 percent during the Clinton administration, second only to Calvin Coolidge’s roaring twenties bull market (see here for Presidential Stock Returns).   The NASDAQ, home of the infamous dot.coms,  rose a multiple of the Dow.

The table below shows the timeline of various key events and the S&P500 returns.

Clinton Table_Impeachment

Even after the news broke and the “blood was in the water” — recall the media frenzy,  probably crazier than now because it involved sex — U.S. stocks continued to march higher.   The S&P500 rose another 21.27 percent until its peak pre-Russia debt default high of 1,186.75 on July 17th.

Summer of 1998 – Russian Debt Default
Ironically,  Russia announced its debt default the same day President Clinton testified to the grand jury he had an “inappropriate relationship” with Ms. Lewinsky on August 17th.   The global markets fell apart and what was a garden variety correction in the S&P500 sharply accelerated.

The Brazian stock market fell 16 percent on September 10th.   The Fed was forced to cut interest rates several times in just 7 weeks.  Systemic risk was rising rapidly as  Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM) ultimately failed and was bailed out by a consortium of financial institutions in late September.

The total decline in S&P500 during this period was 19.34 percent finally bottoming on August 31, many months before the global economic crisis ended.

Was the financial crisis of 1998 the result of the fear of Clinton being impeached?  Hardly, or should we be blunter – NFW!

Remember, the U.S. had the “Committee to Save the World.”

Comittee to Save the World_Impeachment

The 1998 financial crisis was mainly the result of Russia’s debt default and the subsequent huge global margin call.   Hedge funds were big in Russian debt that had defaulted forcing them to sell many of their assets, say, even their Safeway bonds.   As credit spreads significantly widened in almost every credit instrument,  the extremely levered LTCM with all its Nobel laureates tanked.

Even if you believe the march toward impeachment was a contributing factor in the ’98 financial crisis,  it wasn’t,  or it needed a sufficient condition,  and was not even a necessary condition,  in our opinion.    We will admit there is a possibility the Clinton administration was distracted by the scandal and may not have allowed or wanted Russia to default.

We lost a lot of money betting Russia was “too nuclear to fail” even as we were in the euro bonds the Russians continued to pay.  At one point, these bonds with 9 plus percent coupons fell into the teens with current yields of over 60 percent.  There were no buyers in sight.   If only we held on, but couldn’t as we were too levered.

Later, we will make the argument that Watergate may have been the necessary condition of the 1973/74 bear market,  but the OPEC embargo was the sufficient condition.

Impeachment and Acquittal
By the time President Clinton was impeached in the House of Representatives on December 19th, the S&P500 was up 23 percent since the Lewinsky rumors first surfaced.  The Senate acquitted President Clinton on February 12, 1999, and with S&P500 up 26 percent since the start of the scandal, “the long national nightmare” of the bankrupt impeachment short sellers was over.

The S&P500 continued higher for another year, finally bursting on March 24, 2000, up 56 percent from the day of discovery of the Clinton-Lewinsky affair.

Clinton Chart_Impeachment

What we did learn in 1998 was that stock market bubbles don’t pop easily.   That is until they do.

Watergate Scandal
The analysis of Watergate on the stock market is a little more difficult to unpack as it involved the conflation of three major “rock your world” events:

1) A nasty bear market that took the S&P500 down almost  50 percent from January 1973 to October 1974;

2) A potential constitutional crisis (never the case during the Clinton impeachment) as it was uncertain if the White House would turn over “the tapes“.  President Nixon fired the Special Prosecutor who was charged to oversee the federal criminal investigation in Watergate;

3) And we think,  most important, was the first OPEC oil embargo that shook the global economy on October 16, 1973

Watergate Table_Impeachment

The break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate apartment complex took place in the summer of 1972.  It took several months before it hit the front pages as national news and became a Presidential scandal.   Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, now household names, were urban beat reporters rendered to the back pages of the Washington Post when they were assigned to the Watergate story.

The S&P500 was in rally mode going into the 1972 landslide reelection of Richard Nixon. The index peaked on January 11, 1973, at 120.24 and would not regain that level until more than 7 years later.    From the day of the Watergate break-in until the January peak, the S&P500 rose 11.22 percent.

Liddy and McCord Convictions
On January 30, 1973, two members of President Nixon’s re-election committee were convicted for the Watergate break-in.

“…two former officials of President Nixon’s re-election committee, G. Gordon Liddy and James W. McCord, Jr. were convicted yesterday of conspiracy, burglary and bugging the Democratic Party’s Watergate headquarters.”
Washington Post, January 31, 1973

Game on,  Watergate.

Short-term Bottom
The S&P500 continued to decline through the summer until making a short-term low on  August 22nd at 100.53,  down 16 percent from the January high.   It then rallied 11 percent for two months peaking on October 26th.

At this point, the S&P500 was only down 7.4 percent even after the John Dean testimony to Congress and the Saturday Night Massacre and the OPEC oil embargo, of which both occurred just a week before.    Similarly ironic,  the OPEC oil embargo and the Saturday Night Massacre occurred in the same week as did the Clinton confession to the grand jury and Russian debt default happened on the same day.

Watergate Chart_Impeachment

.

The double shock of OPEC, raising the price of oil by 70 percent with further cuts in production to follow,  coupled with the Saturday Night Massacre, raising the specter of a constitutional crisis in the U.S.,  sent the global economy and markets into a tailspin.

As the chart illustrates, these two events marked the end of the short-term rally.  The S&P500 proceeded to fall another 43.5 percent through the resignation of President Nixon on August 8, 1974,  until it bottomed on October 3, 1974.

From its January 1973 high until the resignation of President Nixon in August 1974, the S&P500 fell 32 percent.

OPEC or Watergate?
So we ask you, folks, what was the main cause of the 1973/74 bear market and 50 percent decline of S&P500?  Watergate or OPEC?

Structural Economic Damage of OPEC
Nobody knows for certain,   but we maintain speculate that if the global economy had not suffered the structural damage from the OPEC shock,  the Watergate scandal would have been just noise and the S&P500 would’ve probably not even entered a bear market and suffered only a normal correction.   That is unless Nixon sent tanks out onto Pennsylvania Avenue.

Though the S&P500 bottomed less than two months after President Nixon resigned,  it didn’t regain its January 1973 high until July 17, 1980.   The stagnation of the 1970’s brought on by the structural damage to and the massive realignment of the global economy of the OPEC shocks definitely took a major long-term toll on the financial markets.

Yom Kippur War
An argument can be made that Watergate distracted and weakened the Nixon administration, which emboldened the Arab nations that attacked Israel during the Yom Kippur War in early October 1973.    The Nixon Administration responded with Operation Nickel Grass, a strategic airlift to deliver weapons and supplies to Israel.

This was after the Soviet Union began sending arms to Syria and Egypt.  The Arab nations of OPEC, in retaliation to Operation Nickel Grass, raised the posted price of oil on October 16.  The actions of the Soviets and OPEC may have been the result that they and the world perceived the U.S. weak due to a domestic political scandal.   Pure supposition on our part.

So, Watergate, a necessary condition to the 1973/74 bear market?   Maybe.

What About Trumpgate?
So far no hard facts and no smoking gun, at least that is publicly known, no John Dean testimony, no tapes.

But potentially more complicated.  The underlying allegations are much more serious than covering up of a third rate political burglary and lying about, well, you know.   Also, a much wider net that could consist of many things, including improper business transactions that took place prior to taking office.

Lots of incompetence, strange and suspicious behavior from the administration, combined with speculation, rumors, coincidences, and what appears to be circumstantial evidence of some sort of a coverup, and the punditry in a feeding frenzy desperately trying to connect the dots.   Once again, a total media circus.

Oh yes, and the appointment of the highly and widely respected Special Counsel, Robert Mueller,  to “oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.”

Though the appointment of Mueller illustrates just how serious the matter is, and is becoming, it should be seen as a positive by both those who suspect President Trump is guilty of something as it takes the specter of a constitutional crisis off the table. And for those who believe the President has done nothing wrong,  the appointment of the Special Counsel should vindicate him.   All other things being equal,  the Mueller appointment should be a positive for the markets.

Unless President Trump fires the Special Counsel.

Furthermore, doesn’t it seem like President Trump is making a special effort to go out of his way just to troll his political opponents?

Conclusion
Granted the initial conditions of these three cases differ greatly.  Valuations, liquidity conditions, and the structure of the global economy all have changed dramatically.  But as illustrated in our analysis,  it is usually not a great idea to short stocks based solely on an impeachment trade.   In fact,  we tend to agree with what Professor Jeremy Siegal of the Wharton School said yesterday on CNBC,

“If Donald Trump resigned tomorrow I think the Dow would go up 1,000 points,”  Jeremy Siegel, May 17, 2017

The corollary is that the Republican pro-economic growth agenda is then accelerated as the political distraction, incompetence and protectionist bias of the current administration are removed.  And that the policies are passed before the 2018 election, which the Republicans are becoming increasingly vulnerable to losing both houses of Congress.

The downside scenario is that the investigation lingers, the bad news keeps dripping out, nothing gets done,  the Democrats take the House in 2018 and introduce impeachment hearings.   That may be the most likely scenario and stocks won’t like it, especially given their high valuations.

Our sense,  the Republicans may believe this scenario and double up their efforts to unify and get something done quickly — that is going to the “two-minute offense” — as the clock runs out.   Stock positive.

One Big Caveat
Noted in our analysis are the two big “coincidences” of bad things concurrently occurring at tipping points during the two impeachment proceedings.   The Russian default on the same day President Clinton confessed to the grand jury and the OPEC oil embargo during the same week of Watergate’s Saturday Night Massacre.   Coincidences?

Bad things tend to happen in the world when the U.S. administration is distracted and looks weakened by political scandal.  And, believe us, there is a legion of bad things out there just waiting to happen, all of which are stock market negative.

And then there is “wag the dog“.

The 6 Sigma Event:  President Pelosi in 2019
Finally,   you know we like to think outside the box here at the Global Macro Monitor and live in the fat tails.

Contemplate this 6 sigma scenario:

Bad news for Trump continues to leak out and staffers and acquaintances are indicted all through the rest of 2017 and 2018.   The Democrats take the House and Senate in a landslide in November 2018.

Impeachment charges are brought both against President Trump and Vice President Pence, say, as a co-conspirator on obstruction of justice charges in the firing of James Comey.

It’s 2019 and the Dems control the House and the Senate with comfortable majorities.

The House impeaches the President and Vice President.   The Senate convicts both.

Who is next in line to assume the Presidency?   The Speaker of the House,  Nancy Pelosi?

The probability?  Six sigma or about 2 * 10^-9 or two in a billion.  Most likely,  even much, much lower. 

Hey,  but good stuff for a political thriller or fodder for the House of Cards,  no?

Posted in Politics, President Trump, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments