Wednesday, December 7, 2011

The GAO Audit of the Federal Reserve – Money for Nothin’

Alan Grayson, Former Congressman from Florida’s 8th District had an article in the Huffington Post titled "The Fed Bailouts: Money for Nothing.”  This was a great, if somewhat scary, summary of the GAO audit of the Federal Reserve.  Some of Grayson’s summary comments follow:

“1) In the case of TARP, at least The People's representatives got a vote. In the case of the Fed's bailouts, which were roughly 20 times as substantial (my comment - unbelievably that’s 16-trillion dollars), there was never any vote. Unelected functionaries, with all sorts of ties to Wall Street, handed out trillions of dollars to Wall Street. That's not how a democracy should function, or even can function.

2) The notion that this was all without risk, just because the Fed can keep printing money, is both laughable and cryable (if that were a word). Leaving aside the example of Germany's hyperinflation in 1923, we have the more recent examples of Iceland (75% of GNP gone when the central bank took over three failed banks) and Ireland (100% of GNP gone when the central bank tried to rescue property firms).

5) The main, if not the sole, qualification for getting help from the Fed was to have lost huge amounts of money. The Fed bailouts rewarded failure, and penalized success...The Fed helped the losers to squander and destroy even more capital.

6) During all the time that the Fed was stuffing money into the pockets of failed banks, many Americans couldn't borrow a dime for a home, a car, or anything else. If the Fed had extended $26 trillion in credit to the American people instead of Wall Street, would there be 24 million Americans today who can't find a full-time job?

And here's what bothers me most about all this: it can happen again. I've called the GAO report a bailout autopsy. But it's an autopsy of the undead.” - Alan Grayson


Today, Wednesday, the S&P 500 went up 0.2% while the VIX rose almost 2%.  As I said yesterday, and the day before, that’s an indication that the Options market is not sold on the direction of the market since the VIX usually moves opposite to the S&P. 

I saw indications of high call options mentioned on a Discussion board (call options are on the buy side) so perhaps the rise in VIX will be a happy event.  In theory, the VIX just predicts the magnitude of future moves in the market; not the direction.  In any event, VIX is still falling at a reasonable rate (over the longer run) and our VIX indicator is still signaling buy.

Now, for fun, let’s look at the 1966 Bear Market to see if we are presently following the Bear Market script.  (Engineers have an odd idea of fun.)  We are 11-years into the present Bear market and the correction that ended 25 November 2011 was roughly 29% below the high of this Bear Market (high about 1550 in Sep 2007).

11-years into the 1966 bear market the Dow made lows 25% below the high of the 1966 Bear market (high about 1000).  The Dow went on to make a run upward of 16% before falling in another Bear cycle.

If we go up 16% from the 1099 low we are in the range of 1275-1300.  I don't put too much faith in this sort of analysis, but it is interesting.  A lot of experts are suggesting that 2012 will be a tough year, so who knows? 

I think we’ll make 1290 by year-end and that’s up a little from my previous guess.   (It is just a guess – there is nothing in the NTSM analysis that predicts the future.)  I think the Euro mess will continue on as new “final-solution” agreements are made and this time they’ll keep their pledges…I do have a bridge I’d like to sell.   

The overall NTSM analysis remains BUY. 

I bought back into the stock market at S&P 500, 1155 on 7 Oct after the 6 Oct NTSM buy signal.  I remain 100% long in the long term portfolio (100% stocks in the 401k.). (See the page “How to Use the NTSM System” – the link is on the right side of this page). 

I am 90% long in the trading portfolio. 

Just a reminder: 100% invested in stocks is way too much for most rational folks.   Don’t do it unless you have a high tolerance for risk.