by Peter Schiff

The markets are going through another sell-off phase, yet the traditional notions of a ‘safe haven’ are changing. No longer is the US dollar the default shelter; instead, gold, the Swiss franc, and the Japanese yen are the preferred assets.

All three of these havens – gold, francs, and yen – have been surging upward this month. Two of them, however, are being actively devalued by central banks desperately (and foolishly) trying to curtail appreciation. The Swiss and Japanese are enlisting both policy measures and all the banker-speak they can muster to stem the tide of investment flows into their currencies.

The game is Last Haven Standing, and Spielberg has already acquired the movie rights.

SWITZERLAND: FROM NEUTRALITY TO INTERVENTION

Looking to Europe, the Financial Times now has the awkward task of reporting that mighty European Union’s currency is coming apart at the seams, while neighboring Switzerland has barely enough hotels to house the world’s waterlogged financial refugees. The franc is up 5.41% against the euro this year and almost 14% against the dollar. One wonders if the only way to prevent a collapse of the these major debtor currencies is to back them with Swiss-made wristwatches. At least then they’d have a partial gold standard and there’d be no excuse to be late for an austerity protest!

Unfortunately, the Swiss National Bank is so afraid of the franc’s rise that it has flooded the market with liquidity and cut interest rates to zero. The SNB even recently threatened to peg the franc to the euro. It’s as if survivors on one of the Titanic’s lifeboats were so confused and bewildered that they began tying their boat to the sinking behemoth out of a desire for a ‘stable relationship.’

NOTE TO JAPAN: IT’S NOT THE SPECULATORS

Japan, ironically, has been blessed that while its debt problems are severe, they’ve been severe for so long that markets are willing to take that as a sign of stability. And, aside from the public debt problem, Japan does have fairly impressive fundamentals. They are still a productive economy with high personal savings and exposure to booming China. So, it’s no wonder the Yen has risen 6.63% against the dollar so far this year.

Former Finance Minister, and now Prime Minister, Yoshihiko Noda stated recently that he would “take bold actions if necessary and won’t rule out any possible options” to restrain the yen’s appreciation. Yet, while Noda has said the ministry will study whether “speculation” is behind the yen’s rise, he doesn’t seem to understand that this is a permanent move away from dollars and euros and into anything which might be a better alternative. This is not driven by Wall Street gamblers, but rather by everyday investors seeking shelter.

CLEARLY SHIFTING SENTIMENTS

My readers know that I see these past years in the US markets as one ongoing crisis. We’re not “facing a double-dip recession” as the media suggests; instead, we’re really in the midst of a prolonged economic depression. The periodic market panics since 2007, both in the US and Europe, all stem from the same disease and, as such, ought to be properly understood as related symptoms, not as separate events.

And as one long, ugly narrative, these subsequent panics resemble a series of steps; sharp drops leading down either to a dismal “new normal” or – more likely – a collapse in both the fiat dollar and euro currencies and a widespread return to gold as money.

My brother, Andrew Schiff, wrote an article for my brokerage firm this month reviewing the market turmoil and how it compares to previous crises since ’07. He found a steady shift in what investors perceive as a safe haven.
During the depths of the credit crunch, from October 2008 to March 2009, the S&P lost over a quarter of its value, as investors flocked to the US dollar, driving it up 8%. Foreign stock markets sold off and most foreign currencies fell substantially. The Swiss franc fell over 3%. Gold rose some 6.5% and the yen rose 5.75%, but neither kept pace with the US dollar, which rose 13.5%.

Then, during the dip between April 23, 2010 and July 2, 2010, the S&P dropped again by almost 15%. The dollar rallied barely more than 3%. The Swiss franc gained slightly instead of falling. And this time, both the yen and gold beat the dollar, gaining 4% and 5.5% respectively.

Now here we are in August, and what’s happening?

In extreme volatility, the S&P fell over 13% before rebounding to its starting place. The dollar has remained essentially flat even with intensified fears in the euro zone. The yen is also flat, despite heavy intervention to push it down. The Swiss franc rose 8% before Switzerland’s central bank threatened to peg the currency to the euro, and gold has surged almost 12%!

See the pattern? On each step of this multi-year downward spiral, global investors are slowly but coherently altering their preferred safe haven. Alternatives are being desperately sought, though actions first by the Japanese central bank and more recently by the Swiss have prevented their currencies from fully realizing potential gains as dollar-alternatives.

Fortunately, gold doesn’t have a central bank, so it can rise as fast as the dollar falls.

THE FIAT DOWNGRADE

Whether it is in their interests or not – and I argue it is not – central bankers look set on continued competitive devaluation of their currencies so that their economies don’t have to do the hard work of retooling for the new reality.

That is why gold is doing so phenomenally well, and why it should continue to do so. New gold comes into the market at a rate of about 2% per year. This number has been fairly steady over time, and reflects the ability of mining companies to locate, finance, purchase, and develop new gold mines. I invest in these companies, and trust me, it’s not an easy job.

Contrast this with a paper currency – more dollars can be created by Bernanke simply printing extra zeros on his banknotes. See that $10 bill? Shazam, it’s a $100!

The reason currencies like the yen and Swiss franc are considered safe is simply a longstanding habit of their central banks not to print too much. But a habit is much less reliable than a physical constraint.

Think of a dog that has been trained not to eat steak. If you put it in a room with a juicy ribeye, would you be more confident the steak would be there when you came back if the dog was in a kennel or just sitting there? Just like a dog always craves steak, and will grab a bite when no one’s looking, central bankers always crave the printing press.

That’s why we need to hold an asset for which scarcity is dictated by nature itself – gold.

As this realization becomes more commonplace, and as this depression accelerates, I expect gold to be the Last Haven Standing. This will not be a “new normal,” but rather a return to thousands of years of economic tradition.

A NOTE ABOUT THE FUNDAMENTALS

Those who do not really understand the fundamentals, such as commodity trader Dennis Gartman, continue to look at gold’s rise as a bubble. In fact, Gartman just called the top in gold, again, claiming that one of the “great bubbles of our time” had finally popped.

He cites as evidence the quick 200-point rise to over $1900/oz, which Gartman sees as a speculative blow-off top. He also cites the meaningless fact that one Gold ETF, GLD, has a larger market cap than one S&P 500 ETF. He absurdly compares this situation to the Japanese Emperor’s palace eclipsing the value of the entire state of California at the top of Japan’s real estate bubble. Those ETFs simply represent one way of owning assets, and do not, as Gartman contends, indicate that investors value gold higher than the entire US stock market. In fact, a true comparison of the two asset classes reveals gold’s value is historically low relative to the value of US stocks.

Rather than the bursting of a bubble, the recent technical action in gold is more indicative of a break-out. In fact, the positive divergence of gold stock from bullion in this recent correction is evidence that a more powerful leg in this bull market is about to begin. Up until now, the market for gold stocks has been characterized by fear. However, it now appears to me that gold stocks will make a new high before the metal itself. If the stocks finally begin to lead the metal, it means traders are finally starting to believe in this rally. Rather than evidencing the end of the trend, such a shift in sentiment likely indicates an acceleration in that trend. Maybe when the last skeptic finally throws in the towel, we may finally get the blow-off top Gartman thinks already occurred – but that day is likely many years into the future.

In fact, all the talk about a gold bubble seems to be based on the fact that so many investors are now talking about gold. However, the problem with this argument is that despite all the talking, very few investors are actually buying. Bubbles are not formed by talk, but by action. Before we get a gold bubble, all those investors talking about gold actually have to buy an ounce. In fact, before a bubble pops, its not just investors, but the average man in the street who will have to be buying. Thus far, he has not even joined the conversation.

Nice interview, though I wish Paul would choose more optimistic words when he speaks. All of this “I’m afraid there will be people in the streets like we’ve seen in other countries” talk is worrying Grandma and Grandpa voter out there. It reminds me of my penchant for jokingly yelling “WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!” at the top of my lungs while going over the first big drop on a roller-coaster. You know, just for fun. Of course, Ron Paul is being serious and he’s right. I just don’t know if that is earning him the kind of votes he needs to rise even further in the polls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vFkcjwZOA8

by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital

The basic unwillingness of politicians to face economic and financial realities has caused the United States and European Union to face currency collapse. The politicians are content literally to paper over the problem with massive amounts of newly printed currency. This means that savvy investors, facing major real losses, are turning increasingly to gold. In essence, even though currencies are no longer on a gold standard, they are increasingly being “redeemed” for gold in the marketplace.

For decades, fiscally irresponsible US Administrations have gradually reduced the world’s richest nation, with a currency perceived as ‘good as gold,’ to the position of the largest global debtor, with a debased currency. Furthermore, US stock markets have offered little real return. Indeed, the Dow stands just below 11K, down over 3K points from its all-time high on October 9, 2009. Discounting for inflation shows a loss close to 4K points, or a fall of over 25 percent from its all-time high. Meanwhile, equities in emerging markets have often shown handsome returns.

The recent political wrangling in Washington has damaged the financial credibility of the United States, prompting a long overdue debt downgrade by ratings house Standard & Poor’s. This removes a fundamental pillar supporting the dollar as the global reserve asset of choice.

In Europe, the unwillingness of politicians to face the fatal structural flaws within the euro is encouraging a fear-driven economic recession, sovereign debt defaults, a banking crisis, and, potentially, a currency collapse. This is hurting the euro’s formerly bright prospects of replacing the dollar as global reserve.

This week’s Merkel-Sarkozy summit meeting amounted to nothing constructive. The most popular topic was instituting a Tobin tax on forex transactions. This would, of course, drive financial markets out of the EU to more friendly environments. But more importantly, it leaves the major structural issues of a two-speed Europe unaddressed.

With nothing achieved by the EU’s ruling Franco-German axis, European banks are correctly seen as increasingly vulnerable to further EU sovereign debt defaults. Of course, former communist Merkel and her French ‘poodle,’ the socialist Sarkozy, will find no problem in transferring toxic bank assets to the public purse. But it will require more market anguish before they dare to do it. Once this happens, the euro will be locked on the same railway to devaluation as the dollar.

China’s yuan has strong fundamentals, but is not properly situated to vie for a place on the world stage. It is neither backed by hard assets nor freely floating. Though this policy is changing, it is not yet a true alternative to the dollar as it maintains a fixed exchange ‘band’ to restrain its true value.

Naturally, private investors and foreign central banks are turning to the very monetary instrument that they never should have abandoned: bullion gold. That is why the gold price is rising in $50 leaps per day, with only small corrections. Gold is being re-monetized. [Learn the difference between rare and bullion gold in Euro Pacific Precious Metals' new special report, free for download HERE. Please note: Euro Pacific Capital and John Browne are not affiliated with Euro Pacific Precious Metals.]

Still, despite our continued warnings, and perhaps motivated by yield or a misplaced sense of safety, some investors still are tempted into dollars and US Treasuries, driving them to negative real yields of up to three percent. This may prove to be one of the largest financial traps in history, potentially devastating the savings of many investors. It reflects a fundamental investment strategy flaw.

It has been held that most wise investors should look not at yield and capital appreciation, but at total return. The only need to differentiate between yield and capital growth is for tax purposes. Some investors avoid gold still, because of its lack of yield. This can be a costly mistake when gold’s meteoric capital gains are taken into account.

Some are skeptical because of the performance of silver during the spring. However, it must be remembered that silver is still up some 125% year-over-year. The drop from $50 to $35 was directly related to an unprecedented triple-margin hike by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. The exchange made the same move against gold, but the yellow metal shrugged it off through buoyant demand.

Indeed, while silver is temporarily hobbled by worries of global depression and a corresponding drop in industrial demand, gold appears to have no such reservations. Silver may ultimately surge well past gold as the emerging markets prove themselves able to stand on their own despite an ailing West. But gold is a pure monetary trade, and its signal is indisputable.

As long as politicians continue to paper over their problems by issuing more fiat money, gold will regain its crown as the king of monetary instruments.

To an extent not fully appreciated by the investing public, financial markets are influenced by human emotion just as much as they are by economic data, corporate earnings, and dividend yields. Of all human motivations, fear is perhaps the most powerful. When people get scared, the “fight or flight” instinct forces us to take action.

Simple dangers prompt simple responses. If we unexpectedly encounter a bear on our driveway, we immediately run into the house and call animal control (or, in the country, grab the shotgun). But it’s harder to know what to do when financial danger stalks the stock market. To be honest, most investors are clueless. Is that really a bear? Is it dangerous? What qualifies as a house?

When confronted with fear AND confusion, investors tend to look around to see what other people are doing – hoping that others know something they don’t. This is a big part of our natural and instinctive drive to seek safety in numbers. When financial markets panic, investors follow the herd. If the herd does something illogical, like buying US Treasuries when they pay almost no yield and when the government is essentially bankrupt, it is evidence that people have decided to seek safety in numbers.

But here’s the thing: this herd doesn’t have a leader. As much as we would like to think that there are rational, or sinister, individuals who decide where the herd goes and how fast it will take to get there, in reality, we just have a center of gravity around which the herd coalesces. Individuals may make an impact but the mass has a mind of its own. The center of gravity does move, but it tends to do so glacially.

As a result, we can expect that market movements in the current correction will largely resemble past corrections. However, there will be slight differences, which should be studied intently to determine where the center of gravity is drifting. It’s particularly important to notice where the herd is seeking safety.

Yesterday’s sell-off in the US markets saw the the S&P 500 lose 4.8% of its value. The Dow’s loss was, at 513 points, the biggest one day drop since December 2008. It capped a horrific 10-day plunge that knocked more than 10% off stock prices overall.

The carnage has many investors queasily recalling the nightmare days of the credit crunch of 2008. In one particularly brutal phase of that crisis, between December 16, 2008 and March 9, 2009, the S&P 500 sold off more than 25%. Fear drove investors to seek safety in traditional havens. During that time, the US dollar rallied by 8.4% while foreign currencies sold off heavily, including a 9% dip in the Australian dollar and a 3% haircut for the vaunted Swiss franc. Gold rallied 7.4% during that period, but failed to beat the dollar’s run up.

The next major correction in stocks showed a slightly different result. Between April 23, 2010 and July 2, 2010, the S&P 500 dropped 16%. During that time, the dollar rallied just 3%. Notably, this time around, the Swiss franc did not sell off, but rather rallied by about 1%. More importantly, gold rallied nearly 5%, taking from the US dollar the title of “fear asset of choice.”

These trends have gained momentum in the current sell-off. From April 29, 2011 to August 4, 2011, the S&P 500 lost 11.3%. During that time, the dollar managed just a skimpy .3% gain. Meanwhile, the Swiss franc jumped almost 13% and gold surged 5.6%. It does appear that the crowd has changed at least some of its assumptions. It no longer runs blindly into US dollars. It considers other options.

There are many theories as to what moves the herd’s center of gravity. Here, I don’t think it’s much of surprise. Since 2008, a steady drip of news stories have highlighted the staggering indebtedness of the US government, the unwillingness of its policymakers to confront the crisis, and the stubborn persistence of economic stagnation in the face of growing inflation. Although the dollar is still regarded as a place to go when the going gets rough, that opinion is not as strong as it was in the days before our economy imploded and our government became the economy itself.

I would expect the broad trends outlined here to continue. As economic data continues to disappoint, look for the stock market to continue to fall. If the drop goes too far too fast, look for an early launch of the next round of quantitative easing. QE3 may help stabilize stock prices, but it will further erode confidence in the US dollar. As a result, when the next panic hits, look for the dollar to perform that much worse than it did this time around.

Although the dollar’s doom is clearly written on the walls, the center of gravity in the financial world has moved very slowly and will likely continue to do so. Fortunately, for our readers, the direction of the movement is clear. Thus, we are positioned well in front while Wall Street brings up the rear.

The reliance upon the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency and “safe haven” asset has created a perverse, but deeply entrenched, mindset among global investors. In fact, many believe the major financial players have no alternatives to owning U.S. debt and dollars. They argue that the market for U.S. dollars and Treasuries is the only financial pool large enough to handle the massive liquidity that sloshes around the globe on a daily basis. This idea makes a mass exodus from U.S. debt holdings seem impossible. This provides a nice explanation why the U.S. Treasury bonds can rally even while the government openly flirts with default and ratings agencies issue downgrades. But just because an illogical event occurs habitually does not mean it is logical or tenable.

The sophomoric reasoning behind the dollar “exceptionalism” argument is like assuming a stock can never fall unless a significant portion of shareholders decide to sell. In reality, a buyers strike is all that is needed to puncture a market. If the U.S. experienced just one disastrous Treasury auction, prices could nose-dive and yields could skyrocket across the board on all U.S. debt.

But the problem doesn’t just lie with the United States. Investors around the world are finally beginning to understand that central bank’s thirst for creating inflation, in order to keep their banks and governments solvent, will never be quenched.

This week, the Swiss government took action to weaken the surging franc by lowering interest rates and printing currency. The franc was pushed down briefly, but then snapped back. It’s hard to keep a good currency down. Similarly, the Bank of Japan announced that it won’t stand for Yen appreciation much longer and would likely soon intervene to buy dollars and weaken the Yen.

Meanwhile, problems at the overly indebted countries just get worse. Italian and Spanish debt yields are now following the upward spiral of Greek bonds (and hitting multi year highs). Italian ten-year notes have surged from just above 3% in late 2010 to well over 6% today. For a country whose debt to GDP ratio is currently over 120%, a doubling of interest rate expenses spells disaster.

Enter Jean Claude Trichet who will certainly use his printing press to buy much of the weakening Italian debt that is now festering on the balance sheets of the biggest European banks. But the size of the bailouts needed to deal with Italian and Spanish debts will be several orders of magnitude greater than those needed for Ireland or Greece. Anticipating a massive increase in the Euro money supply, investors are flocking to gold to protect themselves from currency debasement.

Adding fuel to the gold fire is the recent debt deal reached in Washington. The disgusting agreement virtually assures that over the next decade the U.S. will add an additional $8 trillion in public debt, an increase of nearly 80% in ten years! The back-end-loaded deal will cause the amount of deficit reduction to be just $21 billion in 2012 and $42 billion in 2013.

But even this modest debt reduction depends on rosy assumptions from Washington that are always wrong. For example, the Obama administration predicts GDP growth will average well over 3% for the coming decade. But the annualized GDP growth in the first half of 2011 was just 0.9%. That means the actual deficit and debt figures will be far greater than the projections. Given the immediate increase in borrowing needs, and the obvious slowing of the tepid “recovery,” there can be little doubt that the next round of quantitative easing will be launched sooner rather than later.

The incompetency of U.S. credit rating agencies has long been suspected. But their actions in the wake of the debt ceiling agreement now confirm them as liars. After threatening to downgrade U.S. credit if Washington failed to cut $4 trillion in spending, neither Moody’s, Fitch nor S&P had the courage to carry through, despite the fact that the total cuts would amount to only half their requirements. But a credit rating downgrade on Treasuries did come-from China. The Dagong Global Credit Rating agency cut the credit rating on U.S. sovereign debt to A from A+, 5 notches below AAA. And since the Chinese are the biggest foreign buyer of Treasuries, their opinion counts.

This week, more evidence of U.S. stagflation emerged. The ISM manufacturing and non-manufacturing reports showed a slowdown in new orders and employment and the ADP report showed that the U.S. lost 7,000 goods-producing jobs in July. Other data releases showed that layoffs surged 60% last month to a 16-month high. Meanwhile, YOY consumer prices are up 3.6% and M2 money supply is up 7.5% YOY and rising at a 14.6% annual rate in the last quarter. As the problem with stagflation becomes worse, international investors will avoid the U.S. dollar and U.S. debt at an ever increasing rate.

With soaring debt-to-GDP ratios in Japan, Western Europe and America, the desirability of owning precious metals will grow as investors realize the fiat currency system’s days are numbered. Those holding U.S. dollars and U.S. debt will feel the biggest brunt of the change. But it is always darkest before the dawn. As a result of the carnage the re-establishment of gold as the world’s reserve currency is, hopefully, only a few years away.

by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at

By supposedly compromising to raise the debt ceiling, Congress and the President have now paved the way for ever higher levels of federal spending. Although, the nation was spared the trauma of borrowing restrictions, the actual risk of default existed solely in the minds of Washington politicians.  But the real crisis is not, nor has it ever been, the debt ceiling. The crisis is the debt itself. Economic Armageddon would not have resulted from failure to raise the ceiling, but it will come because we succeeded in raising it. This outcome falls along the lines that I had forecast (See my commentary, “Don’t Be Fooled by Political Posturing” from July 9th).

Both parties are now pretending that the promised cuts in spending outweigh the increase in the debt limit. But the $900 billion in identified cuts are spread over a decade and are skewed toward the end of that period. There are an additional $1.4 trillion in cuts that the plan assumes will be identified by a bi-partisan budget committee. But similarly empowered panels in the past have almost never delivered on their mandates.

More importantly, none of these “cuts” are actually binding. There is plenty of time for future Congresses to reverse what was so laboriously agreed to over the past few weeks. My guess is renewed economic weakness will be used to justify ultimate suspension of the cuts. In addition, most of the spending reductions were already scheduled to take effect before this agreement. So what did we really get?

The Congressional Budget Office currently projects that $9.5 trillion in new debt will have to be issued over the next 10 years. Even if all of the reductions proposed in the deal were to come to pass, which is highly unlikely, that would still leave $7.1 trillion in new debt accumulation by 2021. Our problems have not been solved by a long shot.

Essentially, the structure announced today allows both political parties to talk about reform without actually changing anything. To underscore that point, the deal involves less than $25 billion in immediate cuts! This is less than a rounding error in a $3.8 trillion dollar budget. This is politics as usual.

Even these estimates are based on rosy economic assumptions that have no chance coming to fruition. For example, for the current fiscal year, Washington estimates GDP growth at 4%. But actual growth for the first half of 2011 is below 1%!  If our government is over-estimating our current year’s growth by a factor of 4, how accurate could their forecasts be ten years into the future? A more honest assessment of likely economic performance would reveal future budget deficits spiraling out of control.

Some might say that the primary goal of this deal was to avoid the dreaded credit rating downgrade. Unfortunately, the deal addresses none of the ratings agencies’ stated grievances. If they fail to follow through on their downgrade warnings, the rating agencies will lose whatever credibility they have left. For political reasons, the downgrades may not come right away, but they are inevitable. But as has happened so often in the past, by the time the tardy downgrades arrive, the market will have likely already rendered its verdict.

The debt ceiling itself merely represents a self-imposed limit on US borrowing. Since Congress can vote to raise the limit, its existence has been more of a political nuisance than an actual barrier. The operative factor is not how much we allow ourselves to borrow, but how much our creditors are willing to lend. That type of ceiling can’t be raised by an Act of Congress. Once our creditors come to the conclusion that they have lent beyond our capacity to repay, they will be very reluctant to lend more. As trillions in short-term Treasuries mature, the dwindling pool of buyers will demand higher rates of return to compensate them for the risk. But our government is in no condition to afford those higher rates without gutting the rest of the budget.

Last week, it was revealed that despite Obama’s warnings that a default would immediately occur if the debt ceiling were not raised, the administration had already agreed to prioritize interest payments to avoid default. Such preferential treatment is only possible because current interest rates are so low and debt service represents only about 10% of total revenue. When the pool of willing lenders evaporates, net interest payments could quickly consume more than 50% of federal revenue. This is particularly true since rising rates will also plunge the economy into a recession that will substantially reduce revenues – even as debt payments surge.

At that point, prioritizing interest payments would mean deep sacrifices in the rest of the federal budget – including Social Security, Medicare, and the Armed Forces. The question then becomes: will US politicians really be willing to take the political heat that would emerge from prioritizing interest payments to foreign creditors over payments to American voters?

I expect that as soon as our creditors decide that they are no longer willing to lend to us at ultra-low rates of interest, we will refuse to repay what they have already lent.

Besides default or major cuts to domestic spending, inflation provides the only other means for the government to deal with this intractable crisis. Because of its political palatability, inflation is, in fact, the most likely outcome. Once we go down that path, we risk high inflation turning into hyperinflation, which would decimate the remainder of our economy. So, as our leaders congratulate themselves for saving the nation, the reality is that they may have just sold it down the river.

Subscribe to Euro Pacific’s Weekly Digest: Receive all commentaries by Peter Schiff, John Browne, and Michael Pento delivered to your inbox every Monday.

Click here for free access to Euro Pacific’s latest special report: What’s Ahead for Canadian Energy Trusts?

For a great primer on economics, be sure to pick up a copy of Peter Schiff’s hit economic parable, How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes.

The debt ceiling debate that has dominated the headlines over the past month has been thoroughly infused with a string of unfortunate misconceptions and a number of blatant deceptions. As a result, the entire process has been mostly hot air. While a recitation of all the errors would be better attempted by a novelist rather than a weekly columnist, I’ll offer my short list.

After having failed utterly to warn investors of the dangers associated with the toxic debt of entities like Enron, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG, as well as the perils of investing in mortgage-backed securities and sovereign debt of various bankrupt countries, the credit ratings agencies (CRAs) have now apparently decided to be more vigilant. Hence, many have offered conspicuous warnings that they may lower U.S. debt ratings if Washington fails to make progress on its fiscal imbalances. But then, just in case anyone was getting the impression that these rating agencies actually cared about fiscal prudence, Moody’s suggested this week that its concerns would be lessened if Washington were to make a deal on the debt. The agency has even suggested that America’s credit could be further improved if Washington would simply eliminate the statutory debt limit altogether. In other words, Moody’s believes that our nation’s problems are more a function of squabbling politicians rather than a chronic, unresolved problem of borrowing more than we can ever hope to repay.

With or without a deal, the CRAs should have already lowered their debt ratings on the $14.3 trillion of U.S. debt. In fact the rating should be lowered again if the debt ceiling IS raised. And it should be lowered still further if we eliminated the debt ceiling altogether. To lower the rating because the limit is NOT raised is like cutting the FICO score of a homeless person because he is denied a home equity loan.

Republicans are making a different misconception about the debt ceiling debate in their belief that they can dramatically cut government spending without pushing down GDP growth in the short term. In a recent poll from Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed 53% of G.O.P. and 65% of Tea Party members said there would be no economic crisis resulting from not raising the debt ceiling.

They argue that leaving money in the private sector is better for an economy than sending the money to Washington to be spent by government. That much is undoubtedly true. But a very large portion of current government spending does not come from taxing or borrowing, but from printed money courtesy of the Fed. If the Fed stops printing, inflation and consumption are sure to fall. While this is certainly necessary in the long run, it will be nevertheless devastating for the economic data in the near term.

Over the last decade and a half our economy has floated up on a succession of asset bubbles, all made possible by the Fed. Our central bank lowers borrowing costs far below market levels. Commercial banks then expand the money supply by making goofy loans to the government or to the private sector. As a consequence, debt levels and asset values soar and soon become unsustainable. Ultimately, the Fed and commercial banks cut off the monetary spigot, either by their own volition or because the demand for money plummets. The economy is forced to deleverage and consumers are forced to sell assets and pay down debt. Recession ensues. That’s exactly what could happen if $1.5 trillion worth of austerity suddenly crashes into the economy come August 2^nd. Although they don’t seem to realize it, this will create huge political problems for Republicans.

And then there is the deception coming from Democrats who argue that we need to raise taxes in order to balance our budget. This is simply not possible. The American economy currently produces nearly $15 trillion in GDP per annum but has $115 trillion in unfunded liabilities.With a hole like that, no amount of taxes could balance the budget. Raising revenue from the 14% of GDP, as it is today, to the 20% it was in 2000 would barely make a dent toward funding our Social Security and Medicare liabilities. Therefore, we need to cut entitlement spending dramatically. But the Democrats refuse to face the obvious facts.

With the Tea Party gaining traction in Congress, and causing nightmares for incumbents, Republicans have little incentive to raise the debt ceiling (although they raised it 7 times under George W. Bush). Democrats aren’t going to reduce entitlements without raising taxes on “the rich” and Republicans aren’t going to raise taxes when the unemployment rate is 9.2%. There’s your stalemate and anyone expecting a significant deal to cut more than $4 trillion in spending by the August 2^nd deadline will be severely disappointed. Although there has been some movement by the so-called “Gang of Six” centrist senators in recent days, a substantive deal may be more unlikely than most people think. And even if a much smaller deal can be reached in time, the credit rating agencies may follow through on their promise to downgrade our sovereign debt. The fallout could be devastating to money market and pension funds that must hold AAA paper. But an even worse outcome will occur when the real debt downgrade comes from our foreign creditors, when they no longer believe the U.S. has the ability to pay our bills.

In my opinion, the best news for the long term future of this nation is the Republican “Cut, Cap and Balance” plan that just passed the House. It now heads to a much harder hurdle in the Democrat controlled Senate, and if it passes that, to a certain veto from President Obama. At least something so promising got to the table at all. However, I think the country needs some more tastes of brutal reality before such bitter medicine has a chance of going down.

by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital

The past few days have been very bad for the world’s largest banks. American behemoths Citigroup and Bank of America are down about 7% each. Across the Atlantic, things are far worse. BNP Paribas, Barclays, and Banco Santander are all down 13% or more… and Société Générale is down an astounding 16%!

Some pundits warn of an overreaction and suggest this is a buying opportunity for the beat-up financials. I disagree. Rather, I think the financials should now be considered toxic assets. Caution is justified.

It was only a week ago that markets were preoccupied by a downgrade of Portuguese sovereign debt and renewed concerns that Greece will need about $100 billion by year’s end to remain solvent. Now, as eyes are quickly shifting towards the first tremors of financial crisis in Italy, concerns over Greece and Portugal seem rather quaint. With an economy roughly 7 times larger than that of Greece, Italy is simply too big to bail out. Its collapse, like the sinking of a great ship, could create a vortex that drowns Europe’s major banks in red ink.

In addition to exposure to sovereign debt from insolvent nations like Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, major US and EU banks are also massively exposed to toxic mortgage debts, the value of which continues to be eroded by crumbling real estate markets across the West. Meanwhile, at the least opportune moment, the banks are being besieged by ill-targeted regulations devised by vindictive politicians. Finally, banks’ balance sheets are skewed by ultra-low interest rates and new rules that shield them from pricing their assets to market. Beneath a thin veneer of smoke and mirrors, serious risks remain.

Intractable budget negotiations in Washington and Rome have significantly increased the likelihood of default by the West’s two major economic blocs. It could be reasonably inferred that we are entering a new phase of sovereign decline: the US is within weeks of temporary default; Italy is teetering; and the consensus on Greece is shifting toward the ‘German fix’ of bondholder haircuts. What’s worse, there are no long-term solutions readily apparent. The EU is so rigid that it’s only option is to break into pieces, while the US is so pliant that its main political parties are allowed to waste precious time scoring political points at the expense of the greater good.

Since the EU does not have a formal mechanism for handling default, large European banks have been ‘persuaded’ for many months by the ECB and national governments to invest in the debt of financially challenged nations within the EU, most importantly that of Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain (PIIGS). This approach was considered more politically viable than direct investment by the ECB. Now, these European banks are left holding the bag. Since there is still no viable mechanism to deal with this debt at the sovereign level, it’s no surprise that EU banks are being hit hardest in this correction. The question remains: what were they promised in exchange for ‘walking the plank’ into the debt abyss?

American banks have a lesser exposure to sovereign debt of the European PIIGS, but many of these institutions have made massive profits by selling insurance derivatives known as credit default swaps to their European counterparts. This is the same strategy that brought down insurance behemoth AIG in the wake of the 2008 Credit Crunch. Therefore, major American banks are far more heavily exposed to PIIGS debt than first appears. It’s as if they have learned nothing. Even conservative, and supposedly bulletproof, money market funds have exposure to EU bank debt.

I do not expect all of these banks’ shares to go to zero. Powerful governments are likely to resort to almost any means to salvage their grotesque central-banking/fiat-money system. Likely, that will include eventually forcing their citizens to rescue their banks again — but this time from even larger losses. However, in the meantime, the financials’ earnings and share prices could suffer dramatically.

Moreover, Italy’s situation brings some larger questions to the forefront: what happens when the next round of bank bailouts bring major sovereigns to their knees? Where will you want to have your assets positioned if the EU comes apart at the seams, or the US stops paying its soldiers and seniors? What’s your plan if the central banks flood the market with even more cheap money?

Readers are strongly encouraged not to waste time gambling on shaky financials, but rather to build themselves an ark of hard assets and start rowing away from the sinking great ships of state. You don’t want to be caught in the vortex when they go down.

Those who take issue with the outlook of Austrian economists in general, and Euro Pacific Capital in particular, have pointed to the persistence of low bond yields as proof that our philosophy does not hold water. We argue that as the United States takes on ever more debt and prints greater quantities of dollars, that buyers of our debt will demand higher rates of interest to compensate for greater risk.  In fact, our philosophy leads us to believe that rates would currently be spiking as Washington debates whether to raise the debt ceiling yet again or default on existing debt. Instead, rates are hitting close to multi-year lows. As a result, our critics have found a seemingly valid issue. However, we believe that there are strong market reasons that are holding rates low for now that do not invalidate our central thesis.

Looked at objectively, there are a litany of reasons why rates should be much higher than they are.  Official government data from the Labor Department has year over year consumer inflation rising at 3.4%. With the Ten year note offering a paltry 3.1%, negative real interest rates now extend out over a decade! At the same time, total non-financial debt as a percentage of GDP is at the highest level on record and in our view there are no credible projections that show the trend reversing anytime soon. In addition, with the end of quantitative easing, the Federal Reserve will apparently no longer be soaking up 75% of all new Treasury issuance. Given this, does it make sense that yields on Ten Year Treasuries are trading 60% lower than their 40-year average?  Forget the flowers, where have all the global bond vigilantes gone?

But, what makes these low yields on U.S. debt even more unfathomable is the current debate over raising the debt ceiling. If a deal to lower the trajectory of debt isn’t reached by August 2^nd, we are being told that America could enter into default. But you wouldn’t know it from looking at the bond market. It seems that everyone is convinced the U.S. will never renege on her obligations and that the Democrats and Republicans will come to an agreement with time to spare.

Peter Schiff subscribes to this logic. He believes the bond market is pricing in an increase in the debt ceiling that temporarily lays to rest any fears of default. As a result, he believes that traders are buying bonds now so they can sell into the “positive” news that will result from a debt deal in Washington. However, Peter believes, as I do, that an increase in the debt ceiling is actually very negative for bonds. That means that after the dust settles he expects interest rates to rise dramatically. But that won’t stop the traders from booking a quick profit.

However, I believe there is little to support the belief that a deal will be made. Republicans have very little incentive to agree on a deal that includes tax hikes, which are an essential prerequisite for Democrats to assent to dramatic spending cuts. The Republicans want spending cuts without any tax increases and that’s exactly what they will get if the August 2^nd deadline comes and goes. In fact, the Republicans will force a severe dose of austerity upon the American economy, which could be a double-win for the GOP. They may simultaneously balance the budget without increasing revenue and engender a recession that will force the current party out of the White House.

I believe that bond investors may be hedging their bets. If an agreement is not reached there will be a huge reduction in borrowed money that is printed by the Fed. The result will be a severe reduction in the money supply. This forced deleveraging will bring about a needed round of dramatic deflation like we experienced in the fall of 2008. From my perspective that is the best justification for the current low yields on U.S. debt. Maybe the bond market has it right after all; but reasons completely contrary to those offered by market bulls who see low yields as a sign that all is well on the economic front.

Peter and I may differ on the current psychology of bond investors, but we do believe that once the economy slows in earnest once again, the authorities will not hesitate to reignite the monetary madness thereby punishing bond investors with weaker dollars.

by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at

As attention focuses intently on the negotiations to raise the debt ceiling, House Republicans have made a great show of drawing a line in the fiscal sand. They claim that they will not vote for any deal that includes tax increases to narrow the budget deficit. But we all know how the game works in Washington. With the 2012 elections looming the Republican bluster is merely a bargaining chip that they will quickly toss into the pot when they sense a political victory. In fact there are signs that such a compromise is already underway.

House Republicans already have the power to avoid tax hikes and force significant spending cuts. All they have to do is refuse to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances. That’s it. At that point the only discussion would be where to find spending to cut.

But Republicans want to raise the debt ceiling just as much as Democrats, they just want to gain political advantage in the process. They have widely accepted the Democrat stalking horse that a failure to raise the ceiling will lead directly to economic Armageddon. No party wants to be held responsible for such an outcome. Even if the expected Armageddon does not come, the Republicans will be blamed for any problems that follow a no vote on the increase, regardless of the true cause. As a deal is in everyone’s political interest, I am convinced it will happen.

When it comes, it will be structured in a way that allows both sides to claim victory. Each side will praise the other for putting politics aside and having the courage to work together for the American people. They will announce some kind of ten-year deficit reduction plan, with a seemingly large multi-trillion dollar headline number. However, you can be sure that no real spending cuts will take effect in the early years of the plan. All the real action will be scheduled for the later years of the current decade and beyond.

But as in all such plans, actions slotted for distant time horizons have minimal likelihoods of occurring. Unexpected developments (and in Washington all developments are unexpected) always reshuffle priorities. The plan will surely rely on rosy economic assumptions that exaggerate growth forecasts and understate the growth of government expenditures. When reality intervenes, and the assumed deficit reductions never materialize, and the economy continues to stagnate, look for Congress to pass emergency legislation that cancels all bets.

The compromise handed down in a few weeks will also likely include the elimination of tax provisions that the left have described as giveaways to businesses. For instance, Democrats will likely get their way about eliminating the “tax breaks” used by corporate jet owners. Expect the depreciation schedule for these aircraft to be lengthened from the current five years to the seven years that is mandated for planes owned by commercial airlines. While the revenue raised by such a move will be trivial, the rhetoric is far more important. And in this case the rhetoric is dead wrong.

There are no subsidies for corporate jet owners. The fact that corporations are forced to depreciate jets over a period of five years, rather than being able to fully deduct the expenditure immediately, is not a subsidy but a penalty. Just because commercial airlines are penalized more does not mean other corporations are getting a subsidy.

Republicans are also likely to cave on higher taxes on the rich. Some of these increases will be disguised as merely closing loopholes and others will just impose income caps on deductions. But do not be fooled. Some of these moves will bite deeply on the engines of our economy and make it even more difficult to run a profitable business in this country.

The new political spin echoed in Democrat talking points in coast to coast is that the rich are paying the lowest taxes since 1950. The bogus statistic results from the meaningless fact that federal tax revenues currently “only” constitute 16% of GDP. However this figure is rendered meaningless when considering the inflated nature of today’s GDP figures, and the exclusion of rising state and local taxes. When it comes to tax burdens, GDP means nothing.  What counts is what percentage of income taxpayers actually fork over. Those numbers tell a different tale.

Today a married couple with a combined income of $250,000 (assuming each spouse earns 125,000) will pay about 40% of their combined incomes in Social Security, Medicare, and federal taxes, if they take the standard deduction. (I have included as part of their incomes and taxes the Social Security and Medicare taxes paid on their behalf by their employers – which in reality are borne by the employee anyway. I then added that figure to their incomes, and divided the total tax paid by that higher income. I did not factor in this year’s one time 2% payroll tax holiday.)

Compare that to a household in 1950 that earned $25,000 per year (the approximate equivalent to $250,000 today). Assuming all the income was earned by the husband, which was the norm at the time, the total tax take using the standard deduction and including both the employee and employer social security taxes, would have been just below 22%. In other words, despite claims that taxes are at their lowest levels in 50 years, today’s high earning couple pays over 80% more in federal taxes than their 1950 counterpart!

My guess however is that the real difference is even greater. In both instances I used the standard deductions to arrive at taxable income. But the 1950 code was far more generous than the current code in its allowances for tax shelters. As a result, my guess is that the typical couple making itemized deductions in 1950 paid less than half the amount of their modern equivalent. Of course back then there were also far fewer states imposing their own income taxes, and those that did generally had much lower rates than what prevails today. Local sales and property taxes were also lower.

It is interesting to note that about 45% of the total federal tax paid by this modern couple went to Social Security and Medicare. In 1950, Social Security represented less than 1.5% of their total federal tax (Medicare did not yet exist). If you just compare income taxes alone, the modern couple pays 24% in tax and the 1950s couple paid about 21.5%. It is no accident that advocates for higher taxes fail to mention this issue.

The debt problem does not stem from low taxes, but from high spending. I do not expect a deal to lift the debt limit will make any meaningful impact on either. Unfortunately both taxes and spending are likely to head higher in the years ahead. Americans should prepare for the sad reality.

Subscribe to Euro Pacific’s Weekly Digest: Receive all commentaries by  Peter Schiff, John Browne, and Michael Pento delivered to your inbox every Monday.

Click here for free access to Euro Pacific’s latest special report: What’s Ahead for Canadian Energy Trusts?

For a great primer on economics, be sure to pick up a copy of Peter Schiff’s hit economic parable, How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes.

by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital

Most people, provided they have a minimum of experience, know that taking a bone from a dog is a risky proposition. In terms of political power, few dogs are bigger than the American voting public. Taking away, or even threatening to take away, the major entitlements to which they have become accustomed could expose politicians to a mauling at election time. As the American leadership begins to grapple with very large issues of entitlement reform in “sacred” programs such as Medicare and Social Security, many may recoil from the task once the fangs begin flashing.

According to polls, 77% of Americans feel the U.S. Government must cut spending. But when it comes to specifics, the support melts away very fast. Until recently, the strongly Republican 26th District of upstate New York had elected only three Democrats since the Civil War. But in a special election held this month (to replace the resigned Republican Chris Lee) the district fell to the Democratic column for the fourth time in 150 years. Many have theorized that the political upset was based on fears that the budget plan put forward by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan would restrict entitlements, particularly Medicare.

If there is any truth to this, it shows how difficult the process may be for politicians who want to seriously trim the Federal budget. But any glance at the enormity of the problem should provide the necessary courage. This assumes, of course, that there is any courage at all left in Washington.

Currently the U.S. Treasury has public debts of some $14.3 trillion and is pleading, and in fact coercing, Congress for a debt limit increase. But given are already abysmal situation, additional debts should not be considered.

According to the U.S. National Debt Clock, unfunded obligations such as Social Security and Medicare etc., total some $114 trillion — or more than eight times the size of the annual Gross Domestic Product of the entire nation. Divide this figure by the number of households, approximately 115 million, and you come to the startling realization that each American household is liable for nearly $1 million. Add in another $54.9 trillion, which is the total debt held by all levels of government in addition to all business and household debt, and you begin to get an idea of why the future looks bleak.

To finance their spending, governments traditionally levy taxation and incur debts. But excessive taxation carries electoral risks. On the other hand, excessive debt risks a severe, even ruinous flight from government debt securities and skyrocketing interest rates. This is exactly what Greece is now beginning to suffer, despite massive compulsory support from the EU, ECB and the IMF.

But there is a third, decidedly stealthier method that governments are tempted to use. In the past, it was to dilute the gold or silver content of their coins. But with the advent of paper currencies, debasement merely requires printing. All that’s required today is a stroke of a computer key.

Because the U.S. dollar is the international reserve currency, the Fed has been able to camouflage its debasement for decades. Given that many nations are obliged to buy dollars to manage their currency valuations, excess liquidity in the U.S. flows quickly offshore where it’s pernicious effects fall on other nations. Recent news from China, where the government is struggling to contain inflation while civil unrest flares, confirms this hypothesis. Too much more of this and the dollar’s reserve status will be placed in greater jeopardy.

Clearly something has to be done to cut government spending or America’s debt crisis will result in a sudden collapse of the once mighty U.S. dollar. The key question, though, is how to persuade politicians to take the necessary actions when doing so could spell electoral defeat?

The answer is patriotism and an informed population. Only if politicians begin once more to put their country before their party and political careers will it be possible to avert a catastrophic currency collapse. This process must begin with a candid acknowledgement of the facts. America is in dire economic straits and increased hardship in the short-term is both necessary, and ultimately unavoidable, if we are to get back on the path to prosperity. Like Churchill in May of 1940, politicians need to deliver the ugly truth and prepare voters for the inevitable pain.

Only by enacting massive reforms of major entitlements, which includes cuts to Social Security and Medicaid benefits, and reductions in military and domestic spending, will America be enabled once more to balance its books, generate real wealth, and issue sound currency.

But given all that we know of how politics works in America, how many elected officials will grab the bone from the dog’s mouth and pull? Regrettably, I can’t assume many are up for the challenge. As a result, we must assume the worst for the U.S. dollar.