The founder of the most successful hedge fund in the world says capitalism needs to be reformed and that the American dream is lost. – 60 Minutes

Click here for the full interview
The founder of the most successful hedge fund in the world says capitalism needs to be reformed and that the American dream is lost. – 60 Minutes

Click here for the full interview

The Lunch That Changed My Career
Shortly after joining a major money center bank as a young twenty-something economist, fresh from grad school and the World Bank, my boss instructed me to have lunch with two women, who were touring the country as part of a U.S. State Department program, which hosted foreign professionals. Though I recall the bank picked up the check, it was a very expensive lunch, nonetheless, as it almost ended my career just as it was getting started.
The only details I had going into the lunch were that one person was an economist from Mexico and the other an interpreter from the U.S. State Department. No problem. Economists love a free lunch.
Exchanging Views On The Mexican Economy
I covered Mexico for the bank and we had a great conversation over lunch about politics, economics and the future of Mexico. I don’t recall ever discussing the name of her employer. I assumed she worked for the government or a private research group.
It was late August or early September, and the country had just experienced a very contentious presidential election. The outgoing president had implemented a stabilization program to bring inflation down by fixing the peso against the dollar. The inflation rate differential between Mexico and the U.S. remained stubbornly high, however, as in 40 percent plus, causing the peso to become increasingly overvalued
Moreover, the Ministry of Finance was notorious for its maxi currency devaluations during presidential transitions. My Mexican friends would tell me with a straight face there was always pressure on the peso after a general election as the outgoing president was taking his money that he stole during office out of the country. I think they truly believed it.
The Peso
The Mexican markets were very nervous at the time and my fellow economists at other major money center banks were forecasting a 50 plus percent devaluation before the new government would take power in December to bring the purchasing power of the currency back in line. I was much less negative and understood such a large move in the peso would reverse the gains in reducing inflationary expectations and blow any credibility of the incoming government.
I had written and published how Mexico was about to get its inflation under control and the economy could then begin to emulate that of an “Asian Tiger” under the new government. My view was much more bullish than colleagues and received a lot of pushback even within my own bank.
Doing The “Dirty Work”
While walking out to the elevator after lunch the valuation of the peso came up. I passed her our monthly foreign exchange newsletter where I stated the outgoing government would probably move the currency slightly, around 12-15 percent, with the current president doing the “dirty work” before the new government came to power.
Lunch over, back to work.
The Call
On a Monday afternoon, about two weeks later, I was in Washington, making due diligent calls to economists at the IMF, World Bank, and the U.S. Treasury, when I received a call from my boss.
“[Gregor], did you hear what happened?”
“No, what’s up?”, I replied.
“Your full name along with the bank appeared in the headline of the lead story on the front page of the Sunday edition of El Universal, quoting you saying that Mexico was about to devalue the peso” (El Universal is or was the New York Times of Mexico at the time).
I was shocked.
Wait, there’s more.
“The President of Mexico called the CEO of the bank and wants your ass on a platter. He is blaming you for causing the Mexican stock market to fall 10 percent today and the Banco de Mexico’s eventual loss of $1 billion in reserves defending the peso because of ‘your big mouth’!”
I Got Screwed
My first thought was seriously?
That woman I had lunch with a few weeks earlier never revealed to me she was a journalist and quoted our entire conversation on record. WTF?
Why the hell didn’t the State Department give the bank a heads up we were meeting with a reporter with one of Mexico’s major newspapers?
Efficient Markets?
Second, there was nothing new in the article.
I had published the same story and stated the same scenario for the peso over and over for the two months after the election. It was so common knowledge. Furthermore, I was relatively bullish on the peso compared to economists at other money center banks.
Efficient markets, my arse. Come on, man.
The very reason I am always long behavioral economics and short efficient markets.
“You better get back to the office, and fast,” he warned me.
The Wisdom Of The Irish
Totally fazed, I hung up the phone and knew I was in deep shit.
I told my good friend, Desmond MAC., a great economist at the World Bank and fellow Irishman, about my now uncertain plight. He tried to calm me down with some words of wisdom, “[Gregor], remember the only bad publicity is an obituary.”
Nice, but it didn’t relieve my growing anxiety.
The next day I flew back home. I walked into the office after arriving from the airport and my colleagues began joking, “ you market mover, you!” I wasn’t amused, not one bit.
I then went into a meeting with my boss explaining there was no way that conversation would ever have been had with a journalist, much less on the record. I then waited for the hammer to drop.
Not So Bad
I called down to our Mexico City office, where a friend said the country manager was livid, as he feared the government would retaliate by withholding business from the bank. His own read, however, after talking with his contacts in the Ministry of Finance, was that though the government was upset, but not so much as the article in its totality portrayed Mexico’s future in a positive light. Furthermore, he thought my number on the devaluation was exactly what the government was thinking and planning. He did say, however, the “dirty work” comment wasn’t playing well in Los Pinos.
“Banker With A Big Mouth”
Every day during the next week the Mexican ambassador to the United States was out publicly talking about the “banker with the big mouth” trying to calm the country’s markets. I was eating humble pie all that week and took his comments in stride, still waiting for the hammer to drop ending my career as an economist just as it was getting started.
No Hammer, Persona Non Grata
The hammer never dropped.
The CEO didn’t throw me under the bus. I thought that was kind of ballsy on his part.
I was told not to travel to Mexico for at least a year or two, however. I was never sure if Mexico’s president officially declared me persona non grata but he did convey to our CEO I wasn’t welcome in the country. I never came close to the Mexican border over the next year.
Later, when Mexico began their historic debt restructuring, I worked closely and became friends with Mexico’s best and brightest, including the current Secretary-General of the OECD, Angel Gurria, and Augusten Carstens, the General Manager of the Bank of International Settlements. Good guys.
Lesson Learned
The moral of my story is that it was one helluva lesson about dealing with the press. It wasn’t the last time I’d be burned by a reporter, quoted with attribution when I made it clear it was only for background and off-the-record. But, at least I always knew it was a reporter on the other side of the conversation.
I have learned through the years most all journalists are true professionals, trustworthy and very few operate on the dark side.
Ironically, the El Universal reporter had the gall to call me a few months after the article asking to do a “follow-up” piece.
Are you ‘freaking kidding me” I screamed at her and hung up faster than the collapse of Theranos!
Mexico Devalues 16 percent
Three months after the article, the new government came to power and announced Mexico’s new exchange rate policy, which was to move the currency down against the dollar by one peso per day. The annualized rate of devaluation equated to 16 percent. Nailed it!
Note To Our Readers
The Global Macro Monitor website will be under construction over the next several weeks as we search and construct a “fair path” to protect our contributors from the free riders. We have a few more posts in the pipeline but they will be few and far in between. If you are a contributor email us and we will send out our ongoing data analysis or the research you depend on. If not and are interested in contributing, click on the donate widget button on the right-hand side of the blog. Cheers.

Unbelievable last two second comeback to send the Cavs to the NCAA Final against Texas Tech.
The pressure pushing down on Kyle Guy…hits six points in the last seven seconds, including three free throws with less than one second to go from down two points to win by one. Wow!
Just back from The Hummingbird Project flick. Man, have Wall Street movies changed.
Vincent (Jesse Eisenberg) and his cousin Anton (Alexander Skarsgard) want to run a fiber-optic cable from Kansas to stock exchange servers in New Jersey, securing a millisecond advantage over other algorithmic traders. To maximize the gain, the cable must run absolutely straight, through property, mountains and water, a colossal engineering job for which they have hired Marc (Michael Mando, from “Better Call Saul”). But their boss (Salma Hayek), soon to be former, spends heavily to stall the private-works effort. – NY Times
Hollywood’s portrayal of Wall Street has moved from insider trading and big swinging dicks to the speed of market information — neutrinos and milliseconds — and front running investor orders. B-o-r-i-n-g!
Jesse Eisenberg and Selma Hayek are good but no comparison to Michael Douglas and Charlie Sheen.
No “Greed is good,” no “Blue Horseshoe loves Anacott Steel” memorable lines. The only line that stands out in The Hummingbird Project is “it’s all fake [money].”
We are still dazed and a bit livid over President Trump’s call for QE4, and increasingly perplexed how the market just takes such absurdities, including his latest nominees to the Fed, in stride. Is .999 percent the next target for the Fed’s IOER?
We feel as we have been transported to a parallel universe. Facts, words, data, logic, decency, truth, nothing matters anymore. Just make me some more Benjies!
Our revulsion to the QE4 call motivated Global Macro Monitor’s last post, POTUS’ Morning Economic Briefing. Have a look.
Predictive Analytics Of Trump’s Decision Making
We have always thought if an AI predictive analytic algorithm was constructed to analyze and forecast the Trump administration’s decision-making process it would be dominated by the policy conditional,
If the Obama administration supported, proposed or implemented such a policy, then reverse and do the opposite.
Iran, the TPP, and Obamacare. Shall we go on?
There is zero doubt, in our mind, Russian and Chinese government engineers have already generated such an algo or a reasonable facsimile.
S&P500 Performance 26 Months After Inauguration
Using the above logic, the only justification we can conceive for calling for a QE4 unless Trump knows the China trade deal is toast is to further goose the stock market as Trump’s S&P is significantly lagging Obama’s market 557 trading days after the two governments came to power. President Trump is probably aware of and likely obsessed with these relative returns.
The following chart comparing the change in both presidents S&Ps since their respective inauguration date to early April into their third year will surprise many. We had to go back and check our calculation no less than three times. The power of gaslighting!
The data is especially shocking given the “the best economy ever, the greatest stock market ever” rhetoric coming from Trump and his so-called economic advisers. That shit is getting old, folks, and really starting to wear on us.

Why The Obama Outperformance?
Absolutely, there is logic in explaining the differential.
Such as Obama took office when the stock market and economy were collapsing and Trump inherited a bull market and strong economy, so Trump’s market hasn’t experienced the “trampoline effect” that Obama’s S&P did.
But, truth, logic, facts, and data don’t matter anymore, folks. Opinions and pronoucements are the new facts and data in the new Oceania AmeriKa.
The V bottom
Markets are now all about V bottom Fed bailouts. Market Socialism is Capitalism.

We expect the S&P500, driven by what we have tagged the Power of Zero, to close the year at around 3025, of which most of the rest of the year gains will take place in late Q3 and Q4. We then expect a Big Dipper sell-off, say, at least 35 percent, for the reasons we have posted earlier, to a level of around 1984 for the S&P.
Can you connect the cryptic dots here?
Of course, our speculation is only a calculated guess as nobody knows the future.
BFTP = Blast From The Past
Posted December 26, 2016
We hear lots of talk these days about, Why Donald Trump’s Market Rally Echoes Ronald Reagan’s.
We are big fans of Chaos Theory,
Chaos theory is a branch of mathematics focused on the behavior of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions—a response popularly referred to as the butterfly effect.[1] Small differences in initial conditions (such as those due to rounding errors in numerical computation) yield widely diverging outcomes for such dynamical systems, rendering long-term prediction of their behavior impossible in general.
So we thought we’d take a look at the macroeconomic initial conditions at the start of the Reagan Presidency versus the incoming Trump Presidency.
Check out the data:

In most macro categories that we have researched here, the initial conditions just aren’t there for a Reagan type bull market, in our opinion. First, and foremost, are the monetary headwinds.
Monetary Conditions
Reagan began his Presidency with interest rates nowhere to go but south with a 22 percent Fed Funds rate and a 10-year Treasury yield of 12 1/2 percent. Though interest rates were not the policy target of the Fed at the time, just several months into the Reagan Presidency the 35-year bond bull market ignited and drove almost all asset prices from real estate to stocks, including the expansion of the price to earnings multiple.
The polar opposite monetary conditions exist at the advent of the Trump Presidency. Interest rates have nowhere to go but north, we believe, especially if Mr. Trump’s fiscal policy is implemented.
Unemployment
Mr. Trump will not have the labor slack and surplus to draw upon to drive economic growth. The country is pretty much at full employment although the level of tautness in the labor market can be debated. This risks much higher inflation than anticipated if his policies are passed and thus a more aggressive Fed. Also note the aging of the baby boom generation, which has driven much of the growth over the past 30 years.
Total Debt
President Reagan began his Presidency with a relatively small stock of debt. Mr. Trump will inherit a debt-to-GDP ratio almost three times that of President Reagan. This leaves less room for deficits as a result of his tax cuts and increased spending. The Trump plan is to increase economic growth and thus tax revenues through supply side and micro and regulatory policy. This is the second chance for this argument to succeed. Watch this space.
The high debt stock, coupled with expected large deficit spending, risks a spike in real interest rates and a sovereign credit downgrade.
Real Oil Price
President Reagan took office with a relatively high real oil price. Note this was in an era when high oil prices were considered “bad” for the economy. The real oil price dropped almost 75 percent in the first five years of the Reagan administration. President Trump will inherit a real oil price half that of Mr. Reagan, coupled with the ambiguity of not knowing if higher oil prices are good or bad for the economy. We don’t know where to go with this one.
Dollar
Mr. Trump inherits a real trade-weighted dollar a little over 10 percent stronger than President Reagan and, most likely, headed north given the world’s divergent growth and monetary policies. This could act as a headwind on corporate profits and export growth.
Individual Marginal Tax Rates
This is the pearl and central to the supply side argument. Cutting marginal tax rates to incentivize economic behavior and growth, which will increase tax revenues that offset the revenue loss from the tax cuts. Note, President Reagan, cut the top rate from 70 percent to 28 percent. That was Yuuuge! Mr. Trump just doesn’t have the room to do such large tax cuts as he starts at a lower base with the highest tax rate at around 40 percent.
Corporate Profit Margins
President Reagan took office with a lot of corporate inefficiency and room to expand corporate profits. It feels we are close to peak margins. Didn’t we just have an election to improve the wages of the average worker? Watch this space.
Stock Valuations
Much like the debt stock, Mr. Trump will inherit a stock market that is relatively highly valued. Note, one of Warren Buffet’s stock market valuation metrics, Stock Market Cap to GDP, is more than 160 percent higher now than it was when President Reagan took office. The U.S. will need lots of economic growth to “grow” into this metric.
Conclusion
There you have it. The macroeconomic initial conditions at the beginning of two Presidencies. This is just our first quick whack at this analysis.
President Trump is going to have to depend on “animal spirits” to do a lot of the heavy lifting and exquisite execution of supply side, microeconomic, and regulatory reform to increase potential GDP growth. Higher growth will increase the top line of companies and improve earnings. But we think, after looking at the data, the window is narrow.
Can we rally a lot? Absolutely. And probably will given the better business conditions initially created by regulatory reform and the fiscal stimulus.
A Reagan bull market? We don’t think so.
By the way, and contrary to the conventional wisdom, the Reagan bull market is only the 5th largest Presidential bull market since Teddy Roosevelt, just behind the Obama bull market.
We could be wrong and it surely hasn’t paid to short or underestimate Donald Trump. But, he just won’t, and probably, can’t, have the macro tailwinds that President Reagan had at his back given the initial conditions of the macro data.
Stay tuned.
Note To Our Readers
The Global Macro Monitor website will be under construction over the next several weeks as we search and construct a “fair path” to protect our contributors from the free riders. We have a few more posts in the pipeline but they will be few and far in between. If you are a contributor email us and we will send out our ongoing data analysis or the research you depend on. Cheers.
After Trump’s comments on the Fed this morning. calling for more quantitative easing this clip from Being There, one of the greatest movies ever is now more real than fiction. The real Chauncey may soon have some solid intellectual back-up if POTUS can get his two new nominations to the Federal Reserve through the Senate.
The scene is profound as Chauncey’s millionaire friend interprets the conversation with the president as an exposition of the idiot’s economic genius. Kind of like how Mr. Market takes the administration’s economic proclamations as solid. God help us.
Chauncey relates to the world in every conversation with the only two things he has ever known, resorting to gardening and television buzzwords. Similar to, you know, free markets and capitalism.
Watch the full movie here.
QOTD: Quote of the Day
https://twitter.com/reformedbroker/status/1113784568421736449?s=12
BFTP = Blast From The Past
It’s now been more than a year since this post. We can’t take a victory lap on such nonsense but we will say, “we told you so.” The consequences are gonna be Fugly. Ugghh…
It is FOMC day, and the committee just raised the Fed Funds rate another 25 bps.
Well, actually, they increased the interest rate on excess reserves (IOER) by 25 bps to target a higher Fed Funds rate. That is an additional $5.25 billion plus annual interest payment the Fed pays to the banks.
Strange days for monetary policy as the traditional approach to raising interest rates was to drain bank reserves through open market operations, making system liquidity tighter on the margin thus pushing up the Fed Funds rate. Now they pay banks, add liquidity, to lock up their excess reserves at the Fed. It is not a certainty banks will follow so the Fed augments the IOER tool with the overnight reverse repurchase agreement (ON RRP).
Orwellian, indeed. “Tightening Is Easing.”
Policy Mistake Not Our Biggest Concern
Yes, the Fed, like all of us, can’t predict the future, often has the wrong model of the economy, and tends to miss inflection points. Welcome to the world of forecasting.
Ben S. Bernanke does not think the national housing boom is a bubble that is about to burst, he indicated to Congress last week, just a few days before President Bush nominated him to become the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.
U.S. house prices have risen by nearly 25 percent over the past two years, noted Bernanke, currently chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, in testimony to Congress’s Joint Economic Committee. But, these increases, he said, “largely reflect strong economic fundamentals,” such as strong growth in jobs, incomes and the number of new households. – Washington Post, October 27, 2005
But this doesn’t concern us as much as the Fed’s independence.
“Just let it rip”
That is we are worried more about the freedom from White House pressure and interference in conducting monetary policy than getting a few bps wrong on the Fed Funds rate. This is especially true and relevant given the strongman tendencies and lack of respect for institutional norms of the current president.
Here is Larry Kudlow, the president’s new chief economic adviser:
“Just let it rip, for heaven’s sake,” Kudlow said of economic growth in the U.S., during a more than hour-long interview Wednesday on CNBC. “The market’s going to take care of itself. The whole story’s going to take care of itself. The Fed’s going to do what it has to do, but I hope they don’t overdo it.” – CNN
We concede that Kudlow may have made this statement before he was seated as N.E.C. chair.
We have not heard this kind of jawboning directed at the Fed from the White House for many years. Even then, it was only after the president had left office.
WASHINGTON — Former President Bush said in a television interview that he blames Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan for his 1992 defeat.
“I think that if the interest rates had been lowered more dramatically that I would have been re-elected president because the [economic] recovery that we were in would have been more visible,” Mr. Bush told interviewer David Frost. “I reappointed him, and he disappointed me.”
Mr. Bush’s economic advisers, particularly Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, were critical of the Greenspan Fed’s reluctance to cut interest rates more rapidly during the recession of 1990-91 and the sluggish recovery that followed. – WSJ, August 25, 1998
Political Pressures Will Build
Furthermore, the administration is going to feel more political pressure from higher interest rates. Let’s see how it behaves as the Fed continues to ratchet up rates and drains the lifeblood from the stock market. The Dow Jones has no doubt become the voting machine for the Trump administration
Open Seats On The Federal Reserve
There are also three open seats on the Federal Reserve board, including the vice-chair, assuming Marvin Goodfriend is approved by the Sentate, but we do hear rumblings his confirmation may be in trouble. Thus, five seats on the FOMC, including the NY Fed President, are in play for some potential monetary mischief by the administration.
The question now is will Larry Kudlow use a “let it rip” litmus test in nominating future Fed governors?
If Trump wants to get reelected, he should rethink his Federal Reserve picks
If the Senate approves Goodfriend, there will be three more slots to fill on the Fed’s board of governors. Trump should avoid the usual Republican suspects and pick economists who are inclined to vote against rate increases. He can do this in the name of improving his reelection prospects. The rest of us will be happy to see workers get jobs and decent wages. – Dean Baker, LA Times, March 15
Stacking The Deck
That is the larger risk. The administration attempts to stack the deck with “let it rip” doves. Maybe it makes for a short-term sugar high for markets but we suspect the long-term damage of such a move will start to be discounted – an air pocket in the dollar – causing a reduction in the Fed’s credibility and doing structural damage to the U.S. economy.
We have heard nobody, absolutely no one, bring up this as a potential risk, though concerns have been raised about how slow the administration is moving in replacing Federal Reserve board seats and the overall inexperience of the new Fed and staff.
But the future of Fed personnel is now uncertain. Trump still has four open board governor seats he could nominate, although he has been especially slow about filling the ranks of presidential appointees. At the same time, the influential New York Fed president post is up for grabs after William Dudley announced his early resignation, and the presidency of the Richmond Fed is also open after the prior president resigned in April due to a leak scandal. – Business Insider, November 26
Foreign Worries
We have no doubt foreign holders of U.S. assets, especially fixed-income, are concerned, however. Foreigners, mainly central banks, hold over $6 trillion of U.S. Treasury securities. It could be another reason why the dollar is so weak when it should be strengthening.
Look at today’s price action after the FOMC announcement, where growth was upgraded but not inflation risks. Maybe they are betting robots will fill the shortage of workers in the construction industry.

Interesting to hear the spin today: “It was a dovish hike.” The conclusion of many only after watching the price action. This is what we call “retrofitting fundamentals to the price action.”
We have some good friends that deal with foreign investment in U.S. real estate. They constantly pound us about how their Chinese investors believe the U.S. has a big debt problem, including underfunded pensions, that is going to be monetized and inflated away. That is why they are buying up U.S. real assets. Interesting, and we always keep it on the back of our radar.
When Monetary Hawks Convert To Full Blown Doves
An overly dovish Fed seems to contradict everything that the traditional “hard money” Republican Party, including “King Dollar” Larry Kudlow and Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs, David Malpass, has stood for.
We believe political expediency will trump ideology in this administration, however.
If stocks do enter bear market territory, watch the decibel level When [the] Doves Cry in the administration. Will they lean hard on the Fed to ease up?
Then watch how the dollar behaves. That will provide a signal of Fed credibility and a road map to the future.
Confidence is a very fragile thing as the greatest quarterback in NFL history often says. The Fed has had the credibility and confidence of markets for almost three decades now, warranted, or not. Can it endure this administration?
Stay tuned.
COTD = Chart of the Day
W-T-F?
We get that if Trump closes the southern border, the U.S only has three weeks supply of guacamole but…come on, man! As they say, “correlation is not causation” or is it?
Do avocados settle in bitcoin? Or is bitcoin now backed by avocados?
Must be those frickin’ ‘bots.