Oct 012013
 October 1, 2013  Posted by at 9:34 am Finance
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on TumblrFlattr the authorDigg thisShare on RedditPin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

Dorothea Lange “Georgia road signs” July 1937

Sometimes it seems you can never write enough about our various pension plans, and the threats to them. Matt Taibbi’s Looting the Pension Funds brings it all back with a vengeance, the things I’ve written about pensions in the past year, and Nicole’s recent article on Detroit etc. Put together, we get a broader context.

Over the past week, I’ve read yet another slew of reports on what’s going wrong with pensions. You can see it happening in real time wherever and whenever you care to look. For many people that’s probably not a favorite pastime, because it instills fear in their hearts. But I think it’s better to look than to avert one’s eyes, because the difference between what you expect and what you’re actually going to receive grows bigger by the day. Negative growth, that is.

In order to get a better overview, I made a list of points that are threats to pensions. The fact that there are 10 of them is purely coincidental and it’s by no means complete; do let me know what I left out. While I focused mainly on US public pension funds, most of what follows, in some degree or another, is just as valid in US private plans and in Europe and Japan. Not all plans are set up the same way, in fact there are too many differences to list, but one overall trend can be identified across the board: pension funds are irresistible to the predatory financial system, since they are what I called earlier this year: The Last Remaining Store Of Real Wealth, and what Matt Taibbi defines his way:


With public budgets carefully scrutinized by everyone from the press to regulators, the black box of pension funds makes it the only public treasure left that’s easy to steal …


I would say probably pensions are not just “the only public treasure left that’s easy to steal”, they’re more like the only public treasure left, period. And much of it is already gone. Just about everything else has already been either financed with credit or sold to private interests. And pension funds are not far behind. Any and all public treasures are fair game in today’s societies, and unless we find ourselves a large group of politicians and judges that cannot be bought, everything will end up being sold to the highest bidder. This doesn’t mean that every single pension plan is under attack from all the points below in equal fashion, and some plans may – still – be in fine health. But it just might be wise for you to check.



Here goes: 10 threats to your pension plans :



1 – They were always Ponzi schemes to begin with


Unless a rising stream of new members pay in, day after day after day, the plans go bust. Today, as baby boomers start to cash in, the numbers of people who pay into the funds vs those who claim benefits is changing radically. Where once the ratio was 5 or 10 to 1, it’s now often 2 to 1. And those who do pay in today are supposed to build up their own pensions as well, not just pay for present retirees. Who never paid in enough to justify the benefits they now receive, much was supposed to come from their respective governments, and generated by brilliant(ly honest) and god-fearing fund managers.

So yes, fundamentally, the fact that pension plans were set up as Ponzi schemes would have doomed them no matter what. But they did get a lot of help along the way to speed up that process.




2 – They have consistently been underfunded


On this topic, and it’s not the only one, there’s so much material not even a book would suffice. The picture that emerges makes it very clear that both companies and governments on a large scale showed very little respect whatsoever for the laws that are supposed to define the extent of their contributions. Here are a few choice quotes from an article I wrote in 2012:


The Global Demise of Pension Plans


• S&P Dow Jones Indices said that the underfunding of S&P 500 companies’ defined-benefit pensions had reached a record $354.7 billion at the end of 2011, more than $100 billion above 2010’s deficit.

• Fitch Ratings later released its own study of 230 U.S. companies with defined-benefit pension plans and found that median funding had dropped to 74.4% in 2011 from 78.5% in 2010, and that corporate pension assets grew just 2.9% in 2011 amid sluggish returns and a 6% decline in contributions.

• In 2011, company pensions and related benefits were underfunded by an estimated $578 billion, meaning they only had 70.5% of the money needed to meet retirement obligations … a funding level in the 70% zone is considered dangerously low. The looming shortfall, and the move by corporations to 401(k)-type plans in which the level of investment is controlled by employees, could keep many aging baby boomers from retiring … “The American dream of a golden retirement for baby boomers is quickly dissipating … “

• … public pension funds in the U.S. are underfunded by $1 trillion to $3 trillion, depending on who’s making the estimate.

• At least three of the nation’s largest U.S. public pension funds have already announced returns of between 1% and 1.8%, far below the 8% that large funds have typically targeted.

• Ratings agency Moody’s Investors Service calculated this month that if it used a 5.5% discount rate, a rate closer to the way private corporations value their pensions, it “would nearly triple fiscal 2010 reported actuarial accrued liability” for the 50 states and rated local governments to $2.2 trillion. Other estimates put the shortfall even higher.


State Budget Solutions estimated it in a recent study at $4.6 trillion as of 2011.




3 – “Normal” financial crisis losses


A huge source of losses for pension funds has been the 2007-present financial crisis, of course. But how can we fault the fund managers for this if and when their governments and banking sectors issue no warnings at all, when after the fact the overall mantra out of Washington and Wall Street remains that “no-one could have seen this coming”, and when even their legal obligation to invest in AAA-rated paper only is rendered useless by complicit ratings agencies who rate all the nation’s wet tissues, baby napkins and old newspapers investment grade? You can’t expect pension fund managers to be smarter than the entire politico-financial system.




4 – Low interest rates imposed by central banks and Treasury departments


The most obvious point perhaps: with pensions plans historically hugely invested in sovereign bonds, pushing down their yields is severely punishing for fixed income, and in more than one way. This was for example discussed in Britain earlier this year:


QE has left companies with a £90 billion pension bill, MPs told


The Bank of England’s £375 billion policy of quantitative easing has left companies having to find £90 billion to fill pension fund deficits, MPs were told. Mark Hyde-Harrison, chairman of the National Association of Pension Funds, said inflexible pension regulations meant companies had to pay down these deficits, leaving them unable to use the funds to strengthen their balance sheets.

QE has raised the price of gilts, lowered yields and reduced the returns on pension investments, helping push final-salary schemes into large deficits. Government bonds are used by pension fund to ensure they have the necessary funds to payout members in future. Low gilt yields, along with low interest rates, has meant that pension schemes have had to hold more assets to meet those obligations. Mr Hyde Harrison said schemes needed to find £9bn a year over the next ten years to fill the gap.

Pensions expert Ros Altman told the committee that QE had been a “tax on pensions” and “savers”. She said the policy was meant to be expansionary but not for pensioners. “Asset purchase have raised the cost of annuities,” she said, adding that the consequences of QE on pensions had been “overlooked”.




5 – (Mostly illegal) appropriation of funds by various levels of government before financial crisis


An issue that is very closely connected to the next one, since there’s a thin line between a government not paying into a fund and one taking money out.

This first item is from January 2013, and it’s of course eerily reminiscent of today’s government shutdown.


U.S. Debt Ceiling: Government “Borrows” Pension Funds to Avoid Default


The U.S. Treasury, in order to avoid default, has resorted to an eyebrow-raising move: it has borrowed from the federal employee pension fund as the country nears its debt ceiling. The U.S. government stopped investing in the federal employee pension fund Tuesday “to avoid breaching the statutory debt limit,” according to a letter Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner sent to Congress.

Geithner said that the move will free up some $156 billion in borrowing authority, while policy leaders in Washington wrangle over raising the $16.4 trillion debt limit. Geithner promised the fund would be “made whole once the debt limit is increased,” and maintains that federal employees and retirees would not be affected by the action.

But an IOU from the federal government isn’t very settling for those relying on the fund for retirement.


Of course it’s not just the US; indeed, it seems to be a fairly common practice. One way to go about it, undoubtedly a popular one, is to force pension funds into buying more of your sovereign bonds. This is also from January:


Spain Drains Fund Backing Pensions


Spain has been quietly tapping the country’s richest piggy bank, the Social Security Reserve Fund, as a buyer of last resort for Spanish government bonds, raising questions about the fund’s role as guarantor of future pension payouts.

Now the scarcely noticed borrowing spree, carried out amid a prolonged economic crisis, is about to end, because there is little left to take. At least 90% of the €65 billion ($85.7 billion) fund has been invested in increasingly risky Spanish debt, according to official figures, and the government has begun withdrawing cash for emergency payments.



And obviously, this doesn’t only happen on a federal level. It may well be much more common at lower levels where there is less scrutiny.




6 – (Mostly illegal) lower payments from cash-strapped levels of government before and after the financial crisis


This is closely connected to both (mis)appropriation of funds as well as to pension plans being underfunded, though it’s not the only cause of either. Some quotes from Taibbi:


Among the worst of these offenders are Massachusetts (made just 27% of its payments), New Jersey (33%, with the teachers’ pension getting just 10 percent of required payments) and Illinois (68%). In Kentucky, the state pension fund [..] has paid less than 50% of its Annual Required Contributions (ARCs) over the past 10 years, and is now basically butt-broke- the fund is 27% funded, which makes bankrupt Detroit, whose city pension is 77% full, look like the sultanate of Brunei by comparison.

In Rhode Island, some cities have underfunded pensions for decades. In certain years zero required dollars were contributed to the municipal pension fund. “We’d be fine if they had made all of their contributions,” says Stephen T. Day, retired president of the Providence firefighters union. “Instead, after they took all that money, they’re saying we’re broke. Are you f***ing kidding me?”

There’s an arcane but highly disturbing twist to the practice of not paying required contributions into pension funds: The states that engage in this activity may also be committing securities fraud. Why? Because if a city or state hasn’t been making its required contributions, and this hasn’t been made plain to the ratings agencies, then that same city or state is actually concealing what in effect are massive secret loans and is actually far more broke than it is representing to investors when it goes out into the world and borrows money by issuing bonds. Some states have been caught in the act of doing this, but the penalties have been so meager that the practice can be considered quasi-sanctioned.




7 – Bad investments, often through “advisors”


It is no secret that Wall Street firms – literally – made out like bandits in the years leading up to Bear Stearns, Lehman and AIG by selling everyone who had a dime to spare boxes full of opaque financial instruments that the ratings agencies stubbornly kept on rating AAA. There is so much bad faith involved in all this – if not something much worse – that looking back today it’s still hard to understand why no-one was ever truly taken to task for it.

There are a few only seemingly large fines, and some settlements in the same vein, though typically without any admission of wrongdoing. But there’s no denying that people paying into pension funds, all over the world, were robbed blind. And it was sanctioned. In other words: crime pays, especially when everyone looks the other way or it’s even outright legalized.

Is it a criminal act to sell someone “assets” under false pretenses? Apparently not. Is it a criminal act to rate “assets” investment grade when they’re clearly nothing of the kind? Apparently not. The sellers pay fines, and don’t see jail. It’s like getting a speeding ticket. Except that it’s the firm who pays the fine, not the actual perpetrator. he gets a bonus. The rating agencies simply claimed their AAA assessments were not legally binding, that everyone should do their own research. Not even a fine for them.


UBS says it’s settling with U.S. over MBS offerings


UBS AG, Switzerland’s largest bank, said it’s close to a settlement over U.S. mortgage-backed bond sales.

The bank reached an agreement in principle with the U.S. Federal Housing Finance Agency to settle claims related to residential mortgage-backed securities offerings between 2004 and 2007, according to the UBS statement, without disclosing the cost of the settlement. The company is booking about 865 million Swiss francs ($918.5 million) of pre-tax charges, provisions and writedowns in the quarter related to the settlement and a Swiss-U.K. tax agreement.

The FHFA sued UBS in 2011 over $4.5 billion in residential mortgage-backed securities that UBS sponsored and $1.8 billion of third-party RMBS sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, claiming the bank misstated the securities’ risks. These suits alleged losses of at least $1.2 billion plus interest.


Dutch Pension Fund ABP Says It Settled MBS Case With JPMorgan


Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP, the biggest Dutch retirement fund, said it settled a lawsuit with JPMorgan Chase over sales of residential mortgage-backed securities.

“ABP is very content to have reached this settlement and is pleased that JPMorgan was willing to reach a mutually satisfactory conclusion of this litigation,” the Heerlen, Netherlands-based fund said today in an e-mailed statement. Harmen Geers, a spokesman for ABP, declined to comment on the amount of the settlement.

The suit, filed in state court in Manhattan in December 2011, accused the bank of negligent misrepresentation, alleging the sales were based on false and misleading statements. New York-based JPMorgan has denied and continues to deny these claims, ABP said in today’s statement.

ABP has sued other banks in the same court over similar allegations, including Deutsche Bank AG, Credit Suisse Group AG, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc.


Pension and Union Funds Were Upside Down the Moment They Bought MBS


… Remember that these are NOT just “institutional investors” like banks — they are pension funds, unions, cities, counties and states that invested in what was thought to be investment grade securities Triple A rated and insured.

So it isn’t surprising that the investors are now going on the attack. It is obvious that the banks and servicers are having a field day feeding off the carcass of what was purported to be good collateral — the homes of the borrowers. The starting insult though was the money the banks took out of the funds advanced by investors before they started funding mortgages.

In some cases the percentage is a staggering 40%. So for each million dollars that your pension fund put in, the banks immediately removed $400,000 and booked it as trading profits. Now with only $600,000 left, the pool was supposed to make enough money to pay the interest expected by investors plus the principal.

Those figures don’t work and Wall Street knew it. So all they needed was to place bets that the pool would fail and that is what they did under the guise of merely covering the “minor” risk of loss with yet another hedge.


Of course MBS are not the only bad investment made. And of course one might blame the pension funds themselves for their gullibility in this man eat dog world. But regulatory oversight before this came to light, and the legal system’s reaction after, have been found so stunningly lacking one can no longer claim we live under a rule of law. Government agencies settle cases for ridiculously low fines, leaving pension funds not just to fend for themselves, but having to do so with the severe handicap of what can realistically only be seen as low-ball jurisprudence.

If you take a step back and look at where the attacks on the pension funds began for real, you’d probably want to go back to the 1990s, when the Blythe Masters JP Morgan crew started to “invent” new forms of “securities”. That allowed for Wall Street to start selling paper the managers had no way of understanding, and for which they had to trust the sellers on their bright blue eyes.

But as I said, it’s not all MBS. Here’s an example of bad investment losses from the black box that is Detroit:


Real estate investments cost Detroit pension funds more than $144 million over 2 years


Detroit Police and Fire Retirement System and General Retirement System real estate investments have cost the city’s two pension funds more than $144 million during the past two fiscal years, according to an audit of the funds requested by Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr. The preliminary findings are part of an auditor general and inspector general report released Thursday afternoon.

The pension funds were too heavily invested in real estate in 2010-11 and 2011-12, the report says. The General Retirement System had 12.22% of its assets in real estate in 2010-11 and 13.99% in 2011-12, higher than the fund’s self-imposed limits of 10%. The GRS annual report documented more than $73 million in losses.

Likewise, the Police and Fire system had 14.33% in real estate in 2010-11, more than double the 7% limit. In 2011-12, there was 12.6% in real estate, higher than the 8% limit it had for that year. The total of losses for the system was more than $71 million. [..]

The audit first focused on the pension funds’ real estate investments because of ongoing investigations into alleged criminal activity. [..] The audit also found that 13% of the city’s unemployment compensation claims processed between July 2011 and March 2013 were “likely fraudulent.”

In addition, there were questionable interest rates applied to GRS annuities and overtime pay included in the average final compensation calculation, the report’s executive summary says. [..] Orr estimates that the pension funds are a combined $3.5 billion underfunded.




8 – Higher risk investments (chasing yield) – to make up for losses


The losses from the financial crisis, whether they were directly related to securities or not, have made it necessary for pension fund managers to “double up”. And that means increasing their risk. Even if the natural reaction to such vast losses might be to become risk-averse for a while, and even though the yield-chasing attitude that led them into MBS etc. was such a disaster. A move from bonds to stocks must seem obvious for most of them.


The great pension shift: Goodbye safe, dull government bonds


Keith Ambachtsheer has made a living advising pension funds on the best way to meet their obligations to retirees. In 2000, he warned funds to reduce their exposure to stocks, which had reached nose-bleed valuations after a two-decade bull run, and add long-term government bonds. Since then, bond prices have risen about 10% a year on average, while stock markets have treaded water.

Today, his advice has flipped around. With the yield from long-dated bonds barely outpacing the inflation rate, the director of the Rotman International Centre for Pension Management says the safer investment for pension funds – and any long-term investor – is blue chip stocks.

“In this environment, it’s plausible that for long-term investors, their safest investment is buying and holding a diversified international portfolio of dividend-paying stocks” – companies such as Nestlé SA, pipeline utilities and Canadian banks, he said. “It takes a while to wrap your head around that.”

Indeed, it does. Trading in dull but dependable government bonds for inherently riskier stocks seems contrary to sound risk management. Yet, Mr. Ambachtsheer has a lot of company. The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec and GMO LLC, the Boston asset manager led by famed investor Jeremy Grantham, recently have said they are substantially reducing their holdings of bonds with long maturities.

“I’m pretty sure the odds of making money on bonds over a five-year horizon are zero,” added Leo de Bever, head of Alberta Investment Management Corp., the province’s public investment fund manager. “I agree being in high quality stocks is probably a better alternative to bonds. Five years ago I wouldn’t have said that.”


However, as Matt Taibbi says:


A study by noted economist Dean Baker … reported that, had public pension funds not been invested in the stock market and exposed to mortgage-backed securities, there would be no shortfall at all. [..] Baker said, had public funds during the crash years simply earned modest returns equal to 30-year Treasury bonds, then public-pension assets would be $850 billion richer than they were two years after the crash. [..]


I guess the managers think it’ll be different this time. Never is. But most are still stuck with expectations – if not legal obligations – of 8% annual returns, even if that’s profoundly unrealistic; it’s more chasing rainbows than chasing yields. Still, the result will be that they are driven, voluntarily or not, into the hands of the same kind of advisors that were instrumental in in the losses in the first place. A move that is facilitated by the next point:




9 – “Reforms”


Here we get into what Matt Taibbi really focuses on in his article: a politically driven movement, led by the likes of right wing billionaire John Arnold and the Pew Charitable Trusts, aiming to reform pensions plans in such a way there’ll be little left of them.


Rhode Island [..], led by its newly elected treasurer, Gina Raimondo, a 42-year-old Rhodes scholar and former venture capitalist – [..] declared war on public pensions, ramming through an ingenious new law slashing benefits of state employees with a speed and ferocity seldom before seen by any local government.

Called the Rhode Island Retirement Security Act of 2011, her plan would later be hailed as the most comprehensive pension reform ever implemented. The rap was so convincing at first that the overwhelmed local burghers of her little petri-dish state didn’t even know how to react. “She’s Yale, Harvard, Oxford- she worked on Wall Street,” says Paul Doughty, the current president of the Providence firefighters union. “Nobody wanted to be the first to raise his hand and admit he didn’t know what the f**k she was talking about.” [..]

What few people knew at the time was that Raimondo’s “tool kit” wasn’t just meant for local consumption. The dynamic young Rhodes scholar was allowing her state to be used as a test case for the rest of the country, at the behest of powerful out-of-state financiers with dreams of pushing pension reform down the throats of taxpayers and public workers from coast to coast. [..]


In an interview about his article last week, Taibbi said::


… among the problems here is that state and municipal pension funds are actually not covered ERISA which is the federal law governing pensions. So if there is no prudent man rule that requires a certain level of reasonability or prudence in investment, hedge funds probably would not have been a typical public or municipal investment a long time ago, but now they are being used in some cases 10%, 15 to 20% of these state funds are being put into these alternative investments.

If you look on the prospectuses of a lot of these investments, they say right in the front, in huge letters, these are high risk investments, you may lose everything. It is exactly the opposite of what you want to put public money into.


And about John Arnold:


John Arnold is a former Enron energy commodities trader who became a billionaire, one of the world’s most successful commodity traders after the collapse of Enron and he is sort of the new Koch Brothers figure. He is on a crusade. He has created something called the Arnold Foundation which is funding pension reform efforts in multiple states all across the country from Montana to Kentucky to Florida to Rhode Island where I spend a lot of time.

In Rhode Island Arnold donated a lot of money to a 501(c)4 organization called Engage Rhode Island which helped promote the pension reform policies of the sort of Wall Street friendly treasurer they have in that state. And this is sort of the new formula, you have in the Citizen’s United age you have some person, a hedge fund guy like John Arnold, who gives a whole bunch of money to some shadowy organization which advertises this crisis that we can’t afford to pay workers any more so we have to do things differently. We gotta make cuts and then we gotta put all the money in Wall Street managed funds. That is sort of his playbook.


A final quote from the interview, about why he did the article in the first place:


The primary focus of my piece, there were a couple of things. Number one, how did these funds come to be broke the first place? I think everyone realizes that states are in fiscal crises or having trouble paying out their obligations to workers. One of the reasons is that at least 14 states have not been making their annual required contributions to the pension fund for years and years and years. So essentially, they have been illegally borrowing from these pension funds, sometimes going back decades.

Another focus of the piece was the solution that a lot of sort of Wall Street funded think tanks are coming up with now is to get higher returns by putting these funds into alternative investments like hedge funds. In a lot of cases what I’m finding is that the fees that states are paying for these new hedge funds and these new types of alternatives investments are actually roughly equal to the cuts that they are taking from workers. Like in the state of Rhode Island, for instance, they have frozen the cost of living adjustment and the frozen COLA roughly equals the fees that they’re paying to hedge funds in that state. So essentially it is a wealth transfer from teachers, cops, and firemen to billionaire hedge-funders.


With the introduction of hedge funders, we can seamlessly move on to the last point, number 10:




10 – Wall Street and hedge funds


As you see, when we bring up the recent spate of “reforms” proposed – and executed – for pensions, we fall face first into the cesspool that is hedge funds’ growing interest in and interference with “the only public treasure left that’s easy to steal”. Because that’s what these reforms aim for: bring in Wall Street, hand them huge payments for “managing” pension funds, and cut the latter to the bone while you’re at it. Matt Taibbi:


In Rhode Island, over the course of 20 years, [Edward Siedle, a former SEC lawyer] projects that the state will pay $2.1 billion in fees to hedge funds, private-equity funds and venture-capital funds. Why is that number interesting? Because it very nearly matches the savings the state will be taking from workers by freezing their Cost of Living Adjustments – $2.3 billion over 20 years. “They pretty much took the COLA and gave it to a bunch of billionaires,” hisses Day, Providence’s retired firefighter union chief.


By the way, this sort of thing is by no means limited to the US. Just this morning I read that Dutch pension funds saw their costs for external “wealth management” rise by a third from 2012, to $6 billion. Same act, same difference.

Now you might think that they seek out hedge funds for good reasons: they make big profits. But what you would have to recognize first of all is that they make good money anyway through fees:


Hedge funds have good reason to want to keep their fees hidden: They’re insanely expensive. The typical fee structure for private hedge-fund management is a formula called “two and twenty,” meaning the hedge fund collects a two percent fee just for showing up, then gets 20% of any profits it earns with your money.

Some hedge funds also charge a mysterious third fee, called “fund expenses,” that can run as high as half a percent- Loeb’s Third Point, for instance, charged Rhode Island just more than half a percent for “fund expenses” last year, or about $350,000. Hedge funds will also pass on their trading costs to their clients, a huge additional line item that can come to an extra percent or more and is seldom disclosed. There are even fees states pay for withdrawing from certain hedge funds. [..]


Second, that they operate in secret, so you can’t see where your own money is going:


Most pension-reform proposals required that states must go after higher returns by seeking out “alternative investments,” which sounds harmless enough. But we are now finding out what that term actually means- and it’s a little north of harmless.[..] … in recent years more than a dozen states have carved out exemptions for hedge funds to traditional Freedom of Information Act requests, making it impossible in some cases, if not illegal, for workers to find out where their own money has been invested.


And third, that the big profits for hedge funds are a fairy tale:


… underperforming is likely. Even though hedge funds can and sometimes do post incredible numbers in the short-term- Loeb’s Third Point notched a 41% gain for Rhode Island in 2010; the following year, it earned -0.54%. On Wall Street, people are beginning to clue in to the fact- spikes notwithstanding- that over time, hedge funds basically suck.

In 2008, Warren Buffett famously placed a million-dollar bet with the heads of a New York hedge fund called Protg Partners that the S&P 500 index fund- a neutral bet on the entire stock market, in other words- would outperform a portfolio of five hedge funds hand-picked by the geniuses at Protg.

Five years later, Buffett’s zero-effort, pin-the-tail-on-the-stock-market portfolio is up 8.69% total. Protg’s numbers are comical in comparison; all those superminds came up with a 0.13% increase over five long years, meaning Buffett is beating the hedgies by nearly nine points without lifting a finger.


In other words, bringing in hedge funds and other external managers is insanely costly:


…. investing with hedge funds is infinitely more expensive than investing with simple index funds. On Wall Street and in the investment world, the management price is measured in something called basis points, a basis point equaling one hundredth of one percent. So a state like Rhode Island, which is paying a two percent fee to hedge funds, is said to be paying an upfront fee of 200 basis points.

.How much does it cost to invest public money in a simple index fund? “We’ve paid as little as .875 of a basis point,” says William Atwood, executive director of the Illinois State Board of Investment. “At most, five basis points.” So at the low end, Atwood is paying 200 times less than the standard 2% hedge-fund fee. [..]

.The fees aren’t even the only costs of “alternative investments.” Many states have engaged middlemen called “placement agents” to hire hedge funds, and those placement agents – typically people with ties to state investment boards – are themselves paid enormous sums, often in the millions, just to “introduce” hedge funds to politicians holding the checkbook. [..]

In California, the Apollo private-equity firm paid a former CalPERS board member named Alfred Villalobos a staggering $48 million for help in securing investments from state pensions, and Villalobos delivered, helping Apollo receive $3 billion of CalPERS money. Villalobos got indicted in that affair, but only because he’d lied to Apollo about disclosing his fees to CalPERS. [..]


All of which leads Taibbi to surmise:


So when you invest your pension money in hedge funds, you might be paying a hundred times the cost or more, you might be underperforming the market, you may be supporting political movements against you, and you often have to pay what effectively is a bribe just for the privilege of hiring your crappy overpaid money manager in the first place.


And to reach this conclusion:


Politicians quietly borrow millions from these funds by not paying their ARCs, and it’s that money, plus the savings from cuts made to worker benefits in the name of “emergency” pension reform, that pays for an apparently endless regime of corporate tax breaks and handouts. [..]

“This whole thing isn’t just about cutting payments to retirees,” says syndicated columnist David Sirota, who authored the Institute for America’s Future study on Arnold and Pew. “It’s about preserving money for corporate welfare.” Their study estimates states spend up to $120 billion a year on offshore tax loopholes and gifts [..] and other subsidies – more than two and a half times as much as the $46 billion a year Pew says states are short on pension payments.

The bottom line is that the “unfunded liability” crisis is, if not exactly fictional, certainly exaggerated to an outrageous degree. Yes, we live in a new economy and, yes, it may be time to have a discussion about whether certain kinds of public employees should be receiving sizable benefit checks until death. But the idea that these benefit packages are causing the fiscal crises in our states is almost entirely a fabrication crafted by the very people who actually caused the problem.

Everybody following this story should remember what went on in the immediate aftermath of the crash of 2008, when the federal government was so worried about the sanctity of private contracts that it doled out $182 billion in public money to AIG. That bailout guaranteed that firms like Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank could be paid off on their bets against a subprime market they themselves helped overheat, and that AIG executives could be paid the huge bonuses they naturally deserved for having run one of the world’s largest corporations into the ground.

When asked why the state was paying those bonuses, Obama economic adviser Larry Summers said, “We are a country of law … The government cannot just abrogate contracts.” Now, though, states all over the country are claiming they not only need to abrogate legally binding contracts with state workers but also should seize retirement money from widows to finance years of illegal loans, giant fees to billionaires like Dan Loeb and billions in tax breaks to the Curt Schillings of the world. It ain’t right.


Our worlds have increasingly turned into man eat dog, and many of us have been so preoccupied with work and bills to pay and worries and fears for those closest to us that we have hardly noticed. And now we find ourselves here, where many of those those worries and fears have become reality, and we just get more afraid. Many of us perceive things that make us think: “It ain’t right”. Few so far have acted on that, though. But if we don’t stand up for ourselves, for our loved ones, and for what we think is rightfully ours and theirs, everything will be taken away from us. It’s simply how things work in man eat dog. That we can’t change. What we can do is ask ourselves if that’s the kind of world we want to live in. If we decide we don’t, a change may still come, but it won’t be free.


Bruce Springsteen defined man eat dog like this years ago:


Poor man wanna be rich

Rich man wanna be king

And a king ain’t satisfied

Till he rules everything


But most of us don’t really aspire to be kings, even as we’ve become accustomed to living like kings of old. And in our urge to try and hold on to that lifestyle, we’ve become fearful of losing what we’ve become dependent on, and we neglect to protect what is most important: our freedom and the basic necessities of life. Well, they’re busy taking your pension away as we speak. What else are you going to let them take before you stand up?


One more Matt Taibbi quote:


what did Willie Sutton say about why he robbed banks? That’s where the money is. Look, pension funds are sort of the last great big unguarded piles of money in this country and there are going to be all sorts of operators trying to get their hands on that money.


It should increasingly be clear that you can’t count on your government to protect you and what’s yours, for the very simple reason that it is not going to protect you from itself.



Home Forums Your Pension Is Under Attack From All Sides. Here’s 10.

This topic contains 50 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  davefairtex 4 years, 5 months ago.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 51 total)
  • Author
  • #9054

    Dorothea Lange “Georgia road signs” July 1937Sometimes it seems you can never write enough about our various pension plans, and the threats to them. M
    [See the full post at: Your Pension Is Under Attack From All Sides. Here’s 10.]



    I hope that this article goes viral.

    More people need to know how their savings have been stolen.


    Don Levit

    One of the most leveraged “pension funds” in the U.S. is the Social Security trust fund. Almost $3 trillion has been borrowed ffrom the trust fund to pay for government expenses. The government found a creative way of way for battleships, etc. other than raising revenues or cutting expenses, or, simply making discretionary annual appropriations.
    Treasuries were issued as collateral for the loans. When redeemed (needed when cash flow is negative, such as the last few years), new general revenues are needed. That is why, from a cash perspective, the trust fund for Social Security is empty.
    Don Levit


    Those are all good reasons to get out of any pension fund while you can – and that’s exactly what I did. The psychological pressure to conform can be quite overbearing when confronted with pensions advisors, but my advice is to just say no.


    Of course, that leads to the questions of what you do without a pension. There are no easy answers to that one!



    I hope that this article goes viral.

    More people need to know how their savings have been stolen.

    For once, I’ll lend my own voice to that sentiment. Normally, I’m far too critical of myself, but in this case, the lack of perfection is trumped by the strength of the topic itself, and the fact that it’s becoming urgently important.

    So yes, send the link around to everyone you know, use all the social media you can think of and so on. Go crazy!



    Nice article except for one statement….you say that this only some of the Pensions are in trouble and some are just fine? How can that be we are talking about an intrinsic system? When the ship sinks are some people going to stay dry some how….? You can’t just say we are going to have a controlled orderly collapse. Maybe I am misinterpreting former comments about collapse but on the degree that you and stonleigh have mentioned it does not sound like there will be any “safe place”. I am sorry if I am being rude hear but I take exception to this comment because here and other sites I often hear people say “well I feel sorry for those other poor people but I will be fine because I have my pension coming in” “All the young people are screwed” etc…eventually all pensions will fail.



    Hi Folks,

    Any and all public treasures are fair game in today’s societies, and unless we find ourselves a large group of politicians and judges that cannot be bought, everything will end up being sold to the highest bidder.


    B-b-b-but isn’t that the point of a ‘free market economy’???

    Its all a big club, and you ain’t in it! From the horses mouth (ex-world bank lawyer) ‘pensions to pay pennies on dollar – we was robbed’, ‘time to stand up and say enough is enough’ etc:


    Not quite sure how everyone suddenly getting ‘wealthy’ will solve anything now though… :dry:





    Thanks for that garbage.

    Sorry, usually enjoy your posts but I had the misfortune of watching that interview on The Economic Collapse blog yesterday and I don’t fancy another go. Its not that I disagree with her on everything she says – its that I don’t know what she is blathering on about half the time so cannot make an informed decision to agree or disagree with her. You’d really think a World Bank lawyer would be at least a little bit succinct in explaining herself and/or her argument…

    That being said, what I did get from her is that if only the entire world would just *spontaneously* wake up to the truth about our economic operating system, we could crash it and transition to another one where everyone gets to dig up one of the billions of vaults filled with gold, jewels and other precious metals hidden away from all of us idiot peons by our duplicitous economic overlords.

    Forget for a minute that at no point in recorded history has *everyone* (or even the majority?) accepted anything all at the same time or to the same degree, and the fact that past experience tells us that crashing an operating system typically leads to chaos, volatility, violence, uncertainty, criminality, broken promises, etc.

    Even if we forget those things, I’d like her to explain what good a bunch of buried treasure does for all of us when there is not enough energy to go around to continue producing enough food to feed the billion of mouths in this overpopulated hornets’ nest we call Earth?

    Sorry to be negative, but I think she’s (dead) wrong about whether the question is if we love ourselves enough to help ourselves or to let everything go to hell in a hand basket. If we loved ourselves (and our children) enough we would have never let it get as far as it has. Now all that’s left is the brutality of reality when Mother Nature wakes us up to the way the world really works.

    Wow, bit of a fire in my belly tonight… Or perhaps its just a sour mood… but have to wonder at what point all the intellectuals who frequent TAE will decide to cut their losses in terms of workable solutions and start preparing for the fact they may have an inevitable fight on their hands for the simple privilege of survival. Not because their ideas aren’t sound or appreciated by other TAE’ers, but because most of the people are terminally dependent on our current operating system and thus have already plotted our course to disaster, setting the system to ‘autopilot’…



    HERE IS # 11

    Exponential growth.
    ie. inflation. More specifically, engineered inflation.



    To me it kind of just boils down to some simple math presented by John Hussman. His methodology (which has data going back 100 years) suggests that at current valuations, the US equity market will return on average 2.3% per year for the next 10 years. (Current dividends on the S&P: 2.3%).

    This implies cap gains will be 0. What’s more, we typically have a crash every four years or so. So to get that 2.3% annually, you get to suffer through a 40% drop every 4 years.

    10 years from now, if the pension funds manage to survive and avoid selling at the bottoms, they will have expected a 7.5% return and received a 2.3% return. Here’s the math:

    Say you have a billion dollars in a fund.
    10 years @ 7.5% = 2.06 billion.
    10 years @ 2.3% = 1.26 billion.

    That’s some pretty serious underfunding. And that’s where we will be in 10 years, assuming they stick it out, assuming peak energy doesn’t take the “expected returns” math and turn it significantly more bearish.



    Hi V81,

    Thanks for that garbage.

    Sorry, usually enjoy your posts but I had the misfortune of watching that interview on The Economic Collapse blog yesterday and I don’t fancy another go. Its not that I disagree with her on everything she says – its that I don’t know what she is blathering on about half the time so cannot make an informed decision to agree or disagree with her. You’d really think a World Bank lawyer would be at least a little bit succinct in explaining herself and/or her argument…

    Yes I know… Sorry, should have added /sarc at the bottom of that! I guess it does show one thing – if she is wanting to be considered sane, how mad are the other lot and what’s going on in their heads?

    But it does raise some serious points about just what are the options going forward? Forget about the Roman/Aztec/Khmer empires – no one to my knowledge has ever lived through a total global collapse of a technological society. There are so many log-jams of hyper complexity out there just waiting for a chance cluster…

    but have to wonder at what point all the intellectuals who frequent TAE will decide to cut their losses in terms of workable solutions and start preparing for the fact they may have an inevitable fight on their hands for the simple privilege of survival. Not because their ideas aren’t sound or appreciated by other TAE’ers, but because most of the people are terminally dependent on our current operating system and thus have already plotted our course to disaster, setting the system to ‘autopilot’…

    When it goes down it will most probably not be pretty given the vagaries of human nature, especially in the supposedly more developed ‘first world’. Elsewhere it will probably just be another day for most people – maybe it will get a whole lot easier without first worlders telling them what to do all the time. One can conjure up any number of scenarios as the Hollywood fantasy shop amongst others has shown over the years not to mention the doomster blogosphere. :dry:




    “One can conjure up any number of scenarios as the Hollywood fantasy shop amongst others has shown over the years not to mention the doomster blogosphere”

    The scenario/example I’m particularly fond of is one that wasn’t actually Hollywood fantasy, but a real life example – New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

    I think it’s a very telling example of how quickly we the “civilized” can turn on each other and resort to violence, murder, rape, looting, etc. when our food/water/electricity/fuel sources are compromised for even the briefest amount of time. :dry:




    I still don’t understand how you think that some places will be an island and watching all this “collapse” unfold? This seems to be a real problem because that is how a lot of people face this problem…Thinking that they are safe and the “other” people will face problems. If we collapse here in the U.S there is no telling what type of government will take over and how someones’ wealth will or will not be affected. People think that they will still get their pensions while their neighbors starve! After the Nazis marched into France did people think well at least I will still have my pension??!!! You can’t have orderly collapse…..




    I think your comment was directed towards others, but just wanted to expand on that “some places will be an island” comment.

    I kind of think some places might be an island when everything comes crashing down, but generally these places will be so backwater that most people accustom to 1st world living probably won’t be living there (i.e. rural Philippines, Thailand, India, South America, or far-north Canada, etc.).

    Unfortunately that “island” mentality quickly dissipates when we start considering Fukushima-style events, melting polar ice caps, and other problems that impact humanity as a whole.

    So I guess islands will or will not exist based on what the future holds for us? “Prediction is very hard, especially about the future…”




    Well thanks for clarifying that Variable. I think you are spot on with that assessment. I have a lot of University friends and they feel so “protected” from any fall out especially the ones who are tenured and retired. They think they are millionaires! I try to explain to them that they are just as vulnerable by they argue that people will always go to the university and with expanding populations there will be no problem there. I am just a Malthusian chicken little to them!

    Also I am going to see former treasury secretary Snow speak tonight…have you got any zingers I can ask him?


    Mark T

    “Besides, banks shouldn’t be obscenely profitable: they’re intermediaries, and in an efficient economy their profits should be quite easily competed away. When bank profits are high, that’s a sign that the bank in question is extracting rents from the economy, rather than helping it to grow.”



    How crazy do you want it? At first you think it looks like the whole thing was set up to be a scam. And then you realize it doesn’t just look that way.

    How hedge funds capitalized on obscure General Motors bonds from Nova Scotia

    “General Motors Corp.’s bankruptcy, which wiped out shareholders and left taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars, is generating a new wave of profit for hedge funds that supersized their claim by betting on an obscure pool of GM debt issued in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia.

    … Believing the U.S. auto giant was probably bound for bankruptcy, Fortress began in 2006 to buy bonds issued by General Motors Nova Scotia Finance Co., a unit of General Motors of Canada Ltd. Elliott started buying in 2008. By June 2009, the four funds had acquired, for pennies on the dollar, the majority of $1 billion in notes issued by the Nova Scotia unit.

    The funds anticipated that in a GM bankruptcy, the Nova Scotia law governing the notes would allow the holders to make multiple claims on the same debt. One Elliott portfolio manager called the strategy a “double-dip litigation play.” A Morgan Stanley analyst likened the deal to sticking “two straws in one milkshake.”


    Viscount St. Albans

    Feed me, Seymour.

    You don’t look well. It’s time for another bleeding.
    3 min 24 sec — 4 min. The talking points have been prepared. The laws have been written. All that remains is timing the media blitz.


    Let us help you. We need to save you from yourself. From Businessweek magazine: “Is it time for Mandatory Savings?”

    “The retirement savings system isn’t working, especially when it comes to low-income and moderate-income workers…….Larry Fink, founder and chief executive officer of BlackRock (BLK), which manages more retirement money than any firm in the world, calls for a mandatory retirement savings plan……..Mandatory defined-contribution would constitute a second layer in a retirement savings pyramid, above a first layer of Social Security and below a third layer of voluntary savings,”




    “all us individuals make terrible decisions” (with respect to retirement 401k plans)

    Yes, they all know how to make better decisions for us. Frankly, it smacks of Bolshevism.


    Viscount St. Albans

    Steven Rattner, Former New York State Pension Investment Manager and Obama’s Car Czar, is very concerned for your well being. He’s terribly worried that you’re going to hurt yourself. Please, for the sake of your children, give your savings to professionals like him (see 2 min — 2 min 21 seconds).

    And by the way, Steve Rattner’s $6 million in kickbacks to criminals to play with New York State pension money was totally legal and ethical, despite what his business partners said to the SEC. See the first minute.

    It’s too bad Governor Cuomo had his spine removed. Back in 2010, he had Rattner scrambling.



    I’m including the following analysist to give some historical prospective
    for all the newbies.

    David Stockman Explains The Keynesian State-Wreck Ahead – Sundown In America



    Wait……. are you telling me I should not me maximizing my 401k!!!!!



    11. Loss of buying power to inflation, or hyperinflation.

    The losses of the above 10 reasons will be worsened by reason number 11. For over two years now the USA dollar has steadily lost value to the comatose Euro, and this figures to continue, especially if one or more of the weak sisters is forced out of the Euro Zone.

    The only thing propping up the dollar, as shaky as that support has been, is the USA military. But as the world gets increasingly militarized, this edge is losing its ability to keep things whole. Add to this all the bilateral trade agreements and I look for the dollar to grind lower.

    The US Congress is starting to talk ‘austerity’ here, but it is a few decades too late. I’m actually in favor of shrinking the size of the federal govt., but this will result in a loss of gdp, and a smaller tax base in the short/medium run. QE to infinity is the plan.

    Whether they block ObamaCare or not, the deficit is growing by $6 to $7 trillion a year. It is politically unthinkable that they will be able to cut social security or medicare. They don’t even have the guts to go after the relatively recent prescription drug benefit for Medicare, which has added trillions in unfunded liabilities onto the backs of the American taxpayer.



    Losses due to hyperinflation?

    I think first we need to see some inflation. Which we aren’t seeing.

    Inflation and hyperinflation, over the last 5 years, has been an entirely theoretical concern. It was a REAL concern during the formation of the debt bubble because people were madly borrowing money. Now, since they aren’t borrowing, its entirely hypothetical. I’m going to wait until I see people starting to borrow before worrying about inflation, much less hyperinflation.

    And imagining that current social security/medicare promises that will eventually be defaulted upon are actual obligations of the US government – that’s another accounting fiction that will never come true. If you promise your baby a BMW, and then when Baby grows up, you can’t afford to buy one so reneg on your promise, did you have to make car payments on that never-purchased BMW? No, you did not. GAAP deficit is the same thing: worrying about car payments on a promised BMW that you can’t afford, and thus are never going to buy.

    If something is so expensive we can’t possibly afford it, the outcome is easy to predict: we won’t do it.




    There is all this money being generated and almost none of it being released into the general economy, it is all stuck in the craws of the banks and financiers.

    Inflation, as Ilargi and Stoneleigh keep trying to drum into everyone, is a monetary phenomenon caused by too much money chasing too few goods.

    What we have is an ever falling real income and people ever more reluctant to buy anything because that would involve adding debt to an already overburdened budget.

    You don’t cause inflation by printing umpty trillion dollars and putting it all into a vault and not letting anyone have any.

    Can ANYONE of the inflationistas explain to me how all that money gets into circulation to cause the damned inflation? Its already all debt, and nobody wants any of it, so inflation ain’t gonna happen.

    DEflation I can sign up to.

    And when people wake up to the fact that their pension funds have already been destroyed, (more deflation) inflation wont be anywhere near. What we WILL have is structural rising prices as energy real costs rise, as the gyrating relative values of currencies cause first one commodity then another to price itself out of the export markets, then fail.

    I live on an actual island, in NZ, a LOOONG way from everywhere. We will still have it VERY hard, for the rest of our lives. But at least we wont be invaded, nobody will be able to afford the energy to mount a force.



    We are living in a huge giant financial Ponzi bubble. When it bursts, I think we could expect that most everything could deflate quickly because just about everything globally is financially intertwined. Pensions too. I don’t see how any pension, public or private, will be spared.

    Poof, and it’s gone.



    Inflation and hyperinflation, over the last 5 years, has been an entirely theoretical concern. It was a REAL concern during the formation of the debt bubble because people were madly borrowing money.


    Your logic is impeccable. However, it is not difficult to imagine a scenario in which prices do go up. What if foreigners decide to convert their dollars, for example? No amount of printing by the Fed and squirreling by US banks would stop the dollar from tanking. The prices of all imported goods would rise and you would have price inflation in the USA – which would speed up the move away from the dollar.

    The idea that since everything is dominated in US dollars then everyone will – in a crisis – load up on dollars has possibly past its sell-by date. We will see. I am not predicting anything just pointing out that we are dealing with emotions and they can turn on a dime.

    I think almost everyone agrees that the USA cannot import vastly more than it exports indefinitely – it is currently over $1B/day.


    Some people believe that the USA did not attack Syria with cruise missiles for fear that it would be quite impossible to repeat the Iraqi and Libyan experience. The dollar would have collapsed if the missiles missed their targets and ended up in Turkey or Israel.


    I mean, the whole thing is built on a military foundation and if this foundation is found to be wanting the markets would shift pretty quickly.


    Viscount St. Albans

    @ Nassim

    Doctors fear we’re on the verge of an epidemic in Type 2 Diabetes. Little do they know, we’re about to conquer that scourge. The future of medicine is Cholera and Scurvy.

    Demand is what you can afford.

    When US oil demand collapses 75%, consumption could be supplied by domestic conventional supplies. The value of the dollar vs. the yen vs. the ruble won’t have much relevance. The woman on the street will be preoccupied with the weight of earthly possessions balanced precariously on her head.



    What if foreigners decide to convert their dollars, for example?


    I’d like to better understand the the scenario in which you see this event unfolding.

    The way I see it, bailing out on US dollars is an economic death sentence for many developed nations around the world. They’ve hitched their wagons to the US and globalization, and many of their economies look to be worse off than the US in terms of sustainability (though yes, the US is still only the prettiest horse in a glue factory). So to walk away now would probably be one of their last options.

    Anyways, I would agree it is easy to imagine a scenario where prices do go up due to inflationary pressures… the problem I find most people have is providing a plausible narrative where that would happen.


    PS – kudos Bluebird; that is one of my favourite South Park snippets




    Actually, diabetes type 2 is a disease (Metabolic syndrome is the currently fashionable term) which predominately strikes those who are poor and ill-educated. As food gets more expensive, fast carbohydrates become the food-of-choice.

    In the UK, you can almost tell the class to which a person belongs by their girth – or lack of it.

    It was not always like that so it is not a genetic trait


    Viscount St. Albans

    @ Nassim,
    Like debt, waist lines face impending mean reversion.
    One could draw a modified hubbbert’s curve of %belly fat and overlay it on the oil production curve with a 5 year time shift. The coordinated mass production, distribution, and infusion of simple sugars into the bloodstream of the poor becomes the terminal blowout phase of Diocletian State-Corporate Expansion.

    Here is a Studs Terkel interview with Great Depression survivor Peggy Terry:

    “we’d been going to the soup line for about a month, we’d go down there, and if you happened to be one of the first ones in line, you didn’t get anything but the water that was on top. So we’d ask the guy that was ladling our the soup into the bucket everybody had to bring their own bucket to get the soup and he’d dip the greasy watery stuff off the top, and so we’d ask him to please dip down so we could get some meat and potatoes from the bottom of the kettle. And he wouldn’t do it. So then we learned to cuss and we’d say, “Dip down, God damn itl”




    There are lots of scenarios out there. I don’t rate “missiles missing their target” high on the list. Those things can enter a window and blow up inside the building. Whether there are many interesting targets to hit, and whether hitting them would actually advance the cause of peace, that’s another matter. But hitting the target is not a problem I stay up worrying about.

    Certainly if the USD suffers a crash, all prices go up. I rate that as less likely than the eurozone having a problem, or Japan having a problem. I think we’re the last ones to tip over and sink. While we may not be what we used to be, we have vastly more natural resources than Japan, and substantially more than Europe. To me, its not so much about “possible scenarios” as it is my judgement as to the likelihood of them happening, and in what order.

    Likely – Japan, Europe, then the US. At that point, yeah, the buck could tip over and sink. But only after money fled the Eurozone and Japan first.

    This is a “likelihood” thing rather than certainty, and an unexpected military issue might well blow a hole in that scenario, as you say. But for the “regular inflation” scenario, I’m confident I can see that coming by monitoring the various credit metrics. Which right now – point to household deflation (reduction in borrowing), corporate inflation (increase in borrowing), and a reduction in the rate of government borrowing.


    To me, its not so much about “possible scenarios” as it is my judgement as to the likelihood of them happening, and in what order. Likely – Japan, Europe, then the US. At that point, yeah, the buck could tip over and sink. But only after money fled the Eurozone and Japan first.

    Japan owns more T-bills and other assorted bonds than anyone else. Japan has a lot more “domestic discipline” than either EU or US. It’s had 20+ years of deflation and hardly a whimper from the citizenry. For all these reasons, I can’t see it going before Europe – which has a history that provides plenty more reasons-.

    There may come a moment when the US outdoes the rest by such a margin it can lead to severe tensions. That’s by no means merely theoretical. The US is the only safe haven available, and it takes only the occurrence of one or two out of a large number of possible events for money from Japan and Europe to start flowing there in – at first controlled – panic.

    This is a “likelihood” thing rather than certainty, and an unexpected military issue might well blow a hole in that scenario, as you say.

    I’m not ruling out a Fukushima related evacuation of Tokyo, either through a government mandate or sheer hysteria. The Japanese do hysteria well – all together now -, the (closely connected) flipside of the domestic discipline coin.

    But for the “regular inflation” scenario, I’m confident I can see that coming by monitoring the various credit metrics. Which right now – point to household deflation (reduction in borrowing), corporate inflation (increase in borrowing), and a reduction in the rate of government borrowing.

    All those different inflations and deflations only lead to murkier waters. You can really only have either one or the other. And since government debt is far more secure that corporate debt, it’s hard to see how the former would stop borrowing before the latter (unless these borrow straight from the government). Governments have millions of people who can pay off the debt sometime in the future.



    Hi Ilargi,

    And since government debt is far more secure that corporate debt, it’s hard to see how the former would stop borrowing before the latter (unless these borrow straight from the government). Governments have millions of people who can pay off the debt sometime in the future.

    Unless the gov’t decides to shut down and play the ‘oh no we’re gonna default’ card… :unsure: Or… from Kyle Bass in the 1st vid here:

    …all the money your gonna have is under the pillow


    Talk about a freak show – is it just a distraction to hide the shouts of [strike]the emperor has no clothes[/strike] look at the new suit – this one will taper for ever???… :dry:





    It is worth keeping in mind that price inflation in the USA has been averaging 5% over the past 10 years – according to ShadowStats


    Over that period of time, that would total 62% – a very substantial number. Meanwhile, interest rates have been close to zero for many people.

    It is a bit like Birnam Wood moving to Dunsinane – slow, but remorseless.


    It is worth keeping in mind that price inflation in the USA has been averaging 5% over the past 10 years – according to ShadowStats

    Price inflation is a useless term. It completely ignores any and all different reasons why some prices go up or down, even though it should be obvious that this is crucial information if you really want to know what goes on in an economy. It’s a tool for the analytically challenged. It’s also a mistaken term of course, because it doesn’t describe inflation at all, which is money and credit supply x velocity, not what happens to some random basket of goods, or cookies becoming more expensive because the baker has the flu.

    Japan, and I’ve written about this, is a good test case. The idea behind the rise in sales tax there is that it will raise prices, and hence fight deflation. If only things were that simple … Well, if they really were, Japan wouldn’t have deflation, and no government would ever have inflation or deflation problems, they could simply raise or lower taxes. Japan tried the same thing early on in the deflation period (’97?) they’re living through, and it backfired. If you want to project anything useful, you need to exclude taxes from your models. But who does that? John Williams became a hyperinflation guru a few years ago, which is a shame, he had good numbers prior to that. Now it’s all colored by a faulty assumption.

    After 5 years of central bank credit pumping (money printing is a misleading term), 90-odd% of which sits in primary dealers’ accounts at the Fed, I think it should be clear that this credit has no – or hardly any, if you will – influence on prices in the supermarket; at most it lifts asset markets a little because banks with such reserves are perceived as less risky.

    In the end, to raise inflation, you will always need more people spending more quickly, money/credit will have to start flowing faster, and that’s very obviously not happening.



    Schiff lost his marbles a few years ago as well. Maybe that’s inevitable when you go into politics. Unless some really far out extremists get to call the shots, and there’s no sign of that, the whole shutdown is as much of an empty sideshow as Syria was (ever wonder what happened to that?). Whenever the media focus on a topic the way they have on these two, it’s time to look beyond the words and wonder what’s really going on.



    Nassim! Quoting 10-year averages from Shadowstats about 5% average inflation as a response to my claim that for the past FIVE YEARS inflation has been muted seems non-responsive to me.

    For this 10-year interval, 5 of those were the last, mad years of the housing bubble. TCMDO went from 34 trillion to 52 trillion over that period (2004-2008). Do we imagine that 18 trillion dollars of credit growth (54%) in just the US economy alone could cause prices to go up? Ya think maybe?

    Since 2008, TCMDO has gone from 52 trillion to 57 trillion. That’s a big yawn by comparison. Do you see what I mean? Debt bubble pop = TCMDO doesn’t go up = no monetary inflation.

    Just looking at the commodity prices since 2008, one can see that prices are lower now than they were then. Even if you just look at food – the FPO food price index was 140 in 2008, and its at 120 now. That’s a price drop. In anyone’s book, that’s not inflationary.

    Again, I encourage you to focus on what is really happening today. 10 year trends that overlap the bubble years don’t paint an accurate picture of today. Credit is growing only very modestly, and only in corporate America where they are actually making good profits.

    Follow the growth of credit and you won’t be led astray by these people who have their own credibility on the line for predicting imminent hyperinflation “starting a few months from now” – for the past five years.

    Look, if borrowing starts up again I’ll be the first one to sound a warning. I don’t have a prediction I’m making, I just report what’s happening. Right now: no inflation.

    I second the bit about velocity too. It certainly isn’t going up. Declining velocity with very slowly increasing credit does not lead to overall monetary inflation.


    Viscount St. Albans

    The small remaining fraction of middle-class discretionary income has already been promised to big-biz. The unclamied piece of your pay check belongs to new Aetna premiums, carbon taxes, and supplementary mandatory retirement investments with Blackrock. I’m sorry, but JCPenny and Walmart got the short end of the stick. Prices will continue to fall below their basement margin requirement. Pricing pressures are now governed by flea-market dynamics. He who sells first gets the cash. He who sells last goes bankrupt. Love seats for $10 and Lay-Z-boys for $5. NFL flat screens for $3.50. When it comes down to sizzled pork or Sunday gridiron, I’m afraid there’s no competiton, even if you promise the grizzled masses an endless supply of concussions and fractured femurs for their viewing pleasure. In the end, a growling stomach will trump the vicarious pleasure of witnessing writhing pain among ethnic minorities.




    Maybe its spinning the sheep to get the fleece nice’n’dry before they shear it right off! As regards Syria, anecdotal evidence (some one who recently flew out of a Greek island with a US base) said there was ‘a lot’ of military activity – so much so their flight was slightly delayed waiting for ‘the military’ to clear the runway/airspace. Go figure… :unsure:

    Also the ‘cash supply’ outside of the states looks pretty healthy according to ZH: The Rise Of The C-Note “And” The Cashless Economy?…

    “printing $350 billion worth over the last 12 months to meet anticipated robust worldwide demand. “

    Whereas in the US itself its strictly cash-less:

    For the just-ended 2013 Fiscal Year, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (part of the Treasury), produced just 1.8 billion dollar bills. That’s the lowest production count on record since 1980 and a fraction of the 5 billion notes printed in 2000 and 2001 during the Y2K scare. Even back during 2007 and 2008, the BEP was pumping out +4 billion bills a year.

    Which equates to $cash inflation on the outside, $cash deflation on the inside… go figure again… :huh:


Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 51 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.