Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/10/2010 11:31 -0500
Capital MarketsCentral BanksFailFederal ReserveGeoffrey BattGermanyInstitute For International EconomicsInternational Monetary FundLazardMarket CrashNew York TimesWhite HouseYenYuan
Today, we have three headlines of relevance. The first one comes from BusinessWeek as of October 9, “Finance Chiefs Warn Currency ‘War’ Is Risk to Growth” in which we read: “As the International Monetary Fund’s annual meeting began in Washington, policy makers warned that efforts to boost exports by embracing weaker currencies threatened to provoke protectionism and trade imbalances at a time when economic growth is already slowing. China was again the target of criticism as foreign officials called the yuan undervalued and pushed for its appreciation to be accelerated.” This was promptly followed by the Telegraph’s “IMF fails to strike deal over currency frictions”, in which we learn part two of the weekend’s key festivities: “The International Monetary Fund on Saturday night failed to reach agreement on tackling mounting global “frictions” over exchange rate policies despite US calls to deal with the issue more forcefully.” Which brings us to today’s game of ”, which comes, somewhere in time, from the New York Times: “US said to allow decline of dollar against the mark” in which we read a paraphrase of a quote by then Treasury Secretary James Baker III, together with some additional commentary: “‘I think if you look at the underlying economic fundamentals in this country, they’re very, very good,’ he said. But he added that the stock market appeared to be reacting to prospects of tax increases by Congress, the enactment of protectionist legislation to reduce foreign imports, and to fears of rising interest rates and inflation. He also said growth of computer-generated ”program trading” of securities had contributed to the size of the daily sell-offs.” Oddly enough, the situation described in the New York Times was identical, if not better, to what is transpiring right about now. As to what happened 24 hours after the original NYT article appeared, well, we all know that…
More form the New York Times article of choice:
For American tourists, a cheaper dollar means that their dollars buy fewer German marks.
There is the risk, however, that the stock market, which has already plunged 17.5 percent since its high in August, might erode further with a falling dollar. Foreign investors have been a major reason for the market’s big move this year. That was due, in part, to their confidence that when they wanted to repatriate their funds, they would not suffer in a currency exchange. If the dollar falls further, their funds would be worth less in their own currencies.
A decline in the dollar ”could reinforce weakness in the stock market,” said Felix Rohatyn, a senior partner of Lazard Freres & Company. ”Foreign holders will bail out of stocks to bail out of our currency. You have to look at the dollar, not just in the context of the trade market, but in the context of the capital markets as well.”
A decline is also risky because it can lead to accelerated inflation from the higher prices Americans pay for imports. In part because of the 40 percent decline of the dollar from its peak in February 1985, inflation has already picked up a bit, and fears of still higher inflation, and higher interest rates to accommodate the rise in inflation, underlie much of the stock market’s nervousness.
The sense of turbulence in the markets has not spread to the Administration. Mr. Baker said that the Dow had undergone ”major correction,” but that ”we do not see this as a panic situation.” He is proceeding with plans, made some months ago, to depart Sunday on a visit with economic officials in Denmark and Sweden, a Treasury official said.
Comments on Interest Rates
But Mr. Baker flatly rejected speculation that the Government will do anything to cause a rise in interest rates, in particular, an orchestrated increase by the Federal Reserve. Higher rates and recent anticipation of further increases in the United States have been major reasons for the stock market decline. Higher rates are ”an assumption that’s not warranted,” he said.
”That came across loud and clear,” said Neal M. Soss, an economist at the First Boston Corporation and a former Federal Reserve official. ”There’s no tightening imminently.” In Bonn, officials have expressed dismay over Mr. Baker’s comments beginning with a White House news conference on Thursday. They maintain that the rate increases are miniscule – they add up to less than a percentage point – and that they are driven by forces in the markets, not by the Government.
A decline in the dollar against the mark ”would certainly bring a decline of other European currencies,” said John Williamson, an economist at the Institute for International Economics, ”and it would bring a lot of pressure against the Japanese yen.”
Tolerating a decline of the dollar is different from actively provoking a decline, which governments do by moving into the markets and buying and selling currencies. But when governments say they will tolerate a decline, it can become a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Such a passive policy can also fail, however, if the markets determine that economic forces dictate a stable dollar or a rise. The dollar has been unusually stable for months despite the turmoil in stock and bond markets.
”Suppose the dollar doesn’t want to go down?” Mr. Soss asked. At that point the Administration would have to consider a more active policy – saying it wants a lower dollar and selling dollars from the Treasury’s reserves in the markets.
In Paris in February, the leading industrial countries agreed at the French Finance Ministry offices in the Louvre palace that they would alter their domestic economic policies to speed world growth while keeping inflation in check and their currencies at roughly the prevailing levels. Raising interest rates, Mr. Baker says, violate the growth objective of the agreement because they tend to slow economies down. Germany worries the Administration most because its economy is already soft.
The implication of Mr. Baker’s remarks today is a lower ”reference range” for the dollar and the mark, or a lower level at which the countries would try to let currencies trade before they ”intervene” in the markets to keep them from drifting out of the range. The current range for the mark has never been disclosed, but traders presume it is between 1.80 and 1.90 marks to the dollar.
Mr. Baker and the Treasury emphasize that the adjustment can be made within the context of the agreement, which, beyond specifying exchange rates and changes in national policies, set the framework under which the countries will try to coordinate their economic policies in the future.
Once before, last April, the accord accommodated a currency adjustment – a lowering of the exchange rate of the dollar for the yen. ”There was a new level established then,” the other Administration official said.
Although he did not mention the dollar, it was apparent from Mr. Baker’s remarks that a lower dollar was the best tool available to help him try to discourage further German rate increases and to enforce the growth goals quickly.
He said that the German rate increases violated earlier agreements, that he had ruled out pushing up American interest rates, and that the agreements were flexible enough to accommodate adjustments in exchange rates. And by adding that such an adjustment had been made earlier, and that the agreements needed reexamination, he left only one trigger-quick alternative – a lower dollar.
For those who are still unsure, the original article can be found here, and the original date is October 18, 1987. And this time is not different. Well, maybe with one small difference: the Fed. Unlike in 1987, the Fed is now the primary driver in the market, and has to neutralize not only such mundane issues as constant domestic outflows from the capital market, but an increasing outflow by foreigners, which just like in 1987, are accelerating with each day that the dollar keeps trading lower and lower.
In 1987, the market took its medicine quickly, and even though it was painful, manifesting in the form of October 19, 1987’s Black Monday, in which stocks lost almost 25% of their value in one day, this time no such market crash is assured, primarily due to the FRBNY’s dominance of the stock markets. Yet, in addition to death and taxes, the third sure thing is that no matter what, central banks will always, on a long enough timeline, lose to the market.
With the recent addition of the foreclosure scandal, it is now certain that the Fed is juggling one ball too many. Throw in global protectionism and all out currency war and the already stretched equilibrium fails. All it would take for a global reset, now that there is no backer to a consolidated central bank failure, is for one person to demonstrate Soros’ courage and tenacity from another Black day, this time Wednesday, and to call the Fed on its bluff. Whether one will ever emerge, is a different story.
h/t Geoffrey Batt
5 Your rating: None Average: 5 (7 votes)
» Login or register to post commentsPrinter-friendly versionSend to friend
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:45
Scylla y Charybdis.
Login or register to post comments by Red Neck Repugnicant
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:46
Is anyone familiar with this article from 1977:
McCarthy Revisited, the Role of the Press in a dark hour, by Alfred Friendly in the Washington Post.
Login or register to post comments by bugs_
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:54
The press rolls in the dark hour.
Login or register to post comments by breezer1
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:46
rock and a harder place.
Login or register to post comments by 99er
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:47
Login or register to post comments by risk-reward
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:48
How can the PDs keep jacking up “the market” using POMO funds without being concerned about the downside? AND….inquiring minds want to know….how is the POMO money used to jack up the market? Buy SPY? Buy other ETFs? Anybody have a handle on this or is it just “known” that this is happening?
Login or register to post comments by Dick Buttkiss
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 11:49
A rock and a hard (currency) place.
Login or register to post comments by AssFire
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:07
I manufacture and import (mainly with Taiwan). In November I usually purchase most of next year’s goods- not this year. I am waiting- if the taxes increase I will buy half as much.
The government is going to tax my employees healtcare benefits next year. They are insisting that if the employees refuse to take part in our healthcare plan- they must bring “written proof” they have coverage elsewhere. There will be no enforcement of this and the net effect is that more will drop from our plan when it hits them in the pocketbook.
If the government tries to penalize me for their failure to insure themselves, I will quit manufacturing all together. No matter what I do, Goobermint is gonna fuck it up- for everyone. Oh, and the idea of adding jobs in this hostile situation is laughable!!!
Login or register to post comments by scatterbrains
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:33
sucka! you don’t rate no waiver/exemption ala Ronald Mcdonald
Login or register to post comments by Atomizer
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:08
I will begin to post the agenda.
IMF says dollar ‘overvalued’
By Chris Giles in London
Published: October 17 2007 14:00 | Last updated: October 17 2007 14:00
Currency traders were given a green light to continue selling the US dollar on Wednesday, as the International Monetary Fund said the greenback “remains overvalued” and rejected claims the euro had risen too far.
Contradicting Rodrigo Rato, the outgoing IMF managing director, who last week said “right now the dollar is undervalued”, the fund’s staff conclude the dollar is still too high. The multilateral lender also forecast slower growth in 2008 at 4.75 per cent, compared with 5.2 per cent expected this year.
The IMF’s new stance on the dollar will counter the arguments to the contrary made by France and some other eurozone members at this weekend’s meetings of the Group of Seven leading economies and the IMF’s governing body. They have been urging a change in language to temper the fall in the dollar, which dropped by more than 4 per cent against the euro in September alone.
The IMF, however, has little sympathy for struggling eurozone exporters hit by the currency’s rise. It says that even after its recent rise, the euro “continues to trade in a range broadly consistent with medium-term fundamentals”.
Apart from the dollar, the IMF’s economists also think sterling is overvalued, while the Japanese yen and the Chinese renmimbi remain too cheap compared with other currencies.
In some of its strongest language to date, the fund’s officials call on China to let its currency appreciate. Repeating its demand for “greater flexibility” of China’s managed currency, the IMF added that such action was in China’s best interests.
“Further upward flexibility of the renminbi, along with measures to reform the exchange rate regime and boost consumption, would also contribute to a necessary rebalancing of demand and to an orderly unwinding of global imbalances,” the World Economic Outlook argued.
Even with slower growth forecast for the US and a weaker dollar, the IMF sees little improvement in the world’s huge trade imbalances, embodied in the US trade deficit and corresponding surpluses in Asia and in oil exporters.
The Fund thinks that the US current account deficit will remain close to 1.5 per cent of world output until 2012, raising the likelihood of a disorderly plunge in the dollar and protectionism growing over the next few years.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Login or register to post comments by Cathartes Aura
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:26
@ August 22, 2010:
If the International Monetary Fund gets its way, the U.S. dollar will be replaced by the “bancor” as the world’s reserve currency. According to a report published April 13, the IMF would like to adopt a plan of action that would expand the use of SDRs (Special Drawing Rights) to replace the U.S. dollar as the storehouse of value, and eventually create a global currency called the “bancor.”
Bancor” is the name suggested by John Maynard Keynes, the British economist who headed the World Banking Commission that created the IMF during the Breton Woods negotiations, which preceded the United Nations.
Login or register to post comments by zaknick
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:11
Dude, I’m with ya’, buddy! Death to the fascists!
It’s us or them, in case you folks didn’t know it yet!
Login or register to post comments by Atomizer
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:13
The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development -2005
Login or register to post comments by Atomizer
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:18
Lastly, Tyler gave you a story on California Quad Zero account.
This is the bigger picture.
Most informed people are aware that Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserves Act in 1913. In signing this act, this traitor transferred the power of Congress to print money to a private group of international bankers. Since then, instead of printing its own money, the US borrows money for its operations from the Fed at high interest rate. This is what caused the huge deficit which in turn caused the bankruptcy on the United States of America in 1933. The following is a speech by Rep. James Traficant, Jr (Ohio) addressing the House on March 17. 1993.
“Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11… Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth, hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some that say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our demise.
“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; Declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H. J. R. 192, 73rd. Congress in session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Government Offices, Officers and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.”
(It is actually a corporation called THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. filed in the District of Columbia.)
“The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H. R. 13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States.”
In case you don’t know, The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the Federal United States government. The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or premiums are the same.
As to personal property and mortgage, here is why people don’t actually really own their houses: Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “hypothecated” all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, – in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title, the U.S. citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their “subjects”, the 14th. Amendment U.S. citizens, to the Federal Reserve System.
“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson.” Franklin D. Roosevelt, U.S. President, in a letter written Nov. 21, 1933 to Colonel E. Mandell House.
Colonel House was a paid organizer and planner for the Bankers…directly under Rothchild payroll to accomplish very specific tasks in the US for the cabal.
The Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States government either. It is true that not only can it NOT be found in Title 31, but it is nowhere to be found in the entirety of Title 5 U.S.C.
Congress THOUGHT it created it but it didn’t. Just look at the 1100 manual and it tells you so. Congress only created the Commissioner’s Office. He then hired the private collection agency people (IRS) and used them as the tax collectors.
In fact, you won’t find any IRS employee listed as an Employee of the United States Government with a United States Employee Identification number that has been hired by any District Director in the country. Now I suggest you look at 27 Code of Federal Regulations Section 250.11 and therein you will find the definition of “Revenue agent.” That definition reads “Any duly authorized Commonwealth Internal Revenue Agent of the Department of the Treasury of Puerto Rico.”
Ronald Reagan, through the Grace Commission, demonstrated that little or no money of tax paid goes to the government.
Where does our tax money go? When you send money to the IRS it first goes to a Federal Reserve Bank. From there it goes into the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development into what they call a Quad Zero account with a drawback fund from which the IRS refunds are distributed. (Title 22 section 286 United States Code) (31 CFR chapter 11, section 214.7)
What is left is then transferred to the International Monetary Fund (United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, July 22, 1944) this money is then loaned out to other countries around the world including the United States. They must then pay back these loans (with interest) to the Central Bankers, not the United States of America.
Most Americans have no idea of these facts
Here’s your link to begin your research.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): Main Page
Login or register to post comments by mikla
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:42
Geologic time is just “too big”. Humans can’t typically handle it. With training, some can.
Sadly, this discussion is similarly just “too big”. The very idea that the US Federal Government went bankrupt in 1933, and continues to this day to merely operate in receivership, and that all its “subjects” and their properties have been seized as collateral, is just “too big” for most people to handle.
The US Declaration of Independence (and later Constitution) made clear that the individuals living in that new nation were *not* “subjects of the King”. They were not “property” to be manipulated by the Authority. Rather, they were Citizens (not property), and the government derives all authority from the Citizens’ consent.
I shall shed no tears when the Citizens reject the unjust usurpation of property and control by a foreign non-authority.
Login or register to post comments by B9K9
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:39
The third sure thing is that no matter what, central banks will always, on a long enough timeline, lose to the market.
And you don’t think the designers/operators knew/know that? If you speak to a petroleum geologist, they know full well the expected life span of any particular field. No one @ a professional level is in la la land thinking the oil will flow forever.
It is the height of ignorant foolishness to not understand that everything in nature, including man-made constructs such as CBs (since, after all, we are part of nature) follow the same inevitable cycle of birth, growth, decay & death.
If it hadn’t been for a couple of historical events of sufficient magnitude to keep the creaking edifice stumbling along, the Fed would have collapsed long ago. It is a testament more to luck than design that it has survived this long.
The DoD has detailed war plans covering not only situations where the USA attacks Canada & Mexico, BUT has extensive war plans in the event either Canada and/or Mexico attack the USA. In other words, all contingencies are planned out.
But no, the Fed, which has more geniuses than all other organizations combined, is just blithely dancing along, hoping upon hope that their latest scheme will “correct” the markets with nary an alternative contingency plan in place. LOL
Look, Tyler, our battle isn’t with the current Fed, it’s what the power-elite will try and put into place after the dust settles. Hold your fire and wait until you can see the whites of their eyes.
Login or register to post comments by Chartist
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:42
Let’s talk commodities….What’s the cheapest commodity in the world to make? It’s people!…People cost nothing to make and as long as they earn their keep, keep them alive! But when they don’t, the world secretly wants their demise.
100 years ago, labor was cheap and machines were expensive…Today, in this country, people are expensive and machines are cheap…..In countries like China, both labor and machines are cheap. We cannot beat the Chinese in this scenario. And it’s going to take a few decades until the Chinese builds a self sustaining middle class to soak up their output. This is why out country is doomed to a lower standard of living for a long time.
Login or register to post comments by Miles Kendig
on Sun, 10/10/2010 – 12:47
Finding someone that has it within themselves to attempt valorous discretion when counterfeit isn’t possible or desirable is real & rare indeed.
Nice one Geoffrey. Time for a different kind of Chew Me.
Login or register to post comments Comment viewing options Flat list – collapsedFlat list – expandedThreaded list – collapsedThreaded list – expanded Date – newest firstDate – oldest first 10 comments per page30 comments per page50 comments per page70 comments per page90 comments per page150 comments per page200 comments per page250 comments per page300 comments per pageSelect your preferred way to display the comments and click “Save settings” to activate your changes. Search Search this site: Latest News From RAN Squawk 10-08 15:19: RANsquawk ‘Market Wrap Up’: Video uploaded to http://www.youtube.com 10-08 15:13: US EQUITY WRAP 10-08 15:02: IMF’s Strauss-Kahn says too simple to believe that CNY revaluation alone would solve global imbalance problem 10-08 14:53: Support seen in AUD/CHF at 0.9500, trades 0.9502 last 10-08 14:46: IMF chief plans to unveil currency initiative details on Saturday 10-08 14:26: Barclays Capital revises treasury forecasts in research note 10-08 14:20: Broad base CAD strength, USD/CAD prints fresh session low at 1.0115 10-08 14:02: US FIXED INCOME WRAP The Zero Hedge Team
Tyler Durden – Founder
Marla Singer – Foil
Travis – Author
Cornelius – Author
Sacrilege – Senior Researcher
tips [ at ] zerohedge [ dot ] com – Our Reader Tips Mailbox
Make sure to read our “How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]” Guide
ads [ at ] zerohedge [ dot ] com – Advertising Inquiries.
abuse [ at ] zerohedge [ dot ] com – Abuse / Infringement Issues
Zero Hedge Offices:
+41 43 501 6717
+44 20 3318 4753
copyright ©2009, 2010 zero hedge – limited reproduction (with attribution) permitted by request
zero hedge’s redundancy powered by:
Drupal e-commerce provided by Ubercart.
View the Original article