Deflation: How to protect your portfolio

Deflation: How to protect your portfolio
Should you be protecting your portfolio against deflation or inflation, or hedging your bets? Emma Simon looks at the options

By Emma SimonLast Updated: 9:37PM GMT 27 Mar 2009

Investors face some tough choices as "zeroflation" leaves them caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of deflation in the short term followed by the risk of inflation in the medium to long term.

Should they be turning to the safe haven of government gilts as a hedge against deflation and economic depression?

Related Articles
Zeroflation: Who wins?
Quantitative easing: the modern way to print money or a therapy of last resort?
Isas: The experts' tips for 2009
The best paying savings accounts
Inflation: how to protect your portfolio
Gold: 'Inflation will beat deflation and gold will hit $3,000'

Or is there a bigger threat on the horizon – with inflation gathering pace again?

Investors could be forgiven for assuming that rising prices are the last thing they need to worry about given last week's figures.

The retail price index – one measure of inflation – has fallen to zero. In other words, prices remain unchanged compared to a year ago. This has prompted fears that recession may bring about a period of flat, or falling, prices.

But the Government's preferred measure of inflation – the Consumer Price Index – jumped unexpectedly to 3.2pc in February, showing that some prices are still rising ahead of Government targets.

Why is there a difference between these two figures? Put simply, only the Retail Price Index (RPI) takes into account monthly mortgage repayments. These have fallen sharply, thanks to an unprecedented series of interest rate cuts. CPI ignores this data, so there has not been any corresponding decline.

Most experts agree that, for the short term at least, we are in a period of zeroflation or even deflation. But many are warning investors to look to the long term instead.

David Kuo, of the financial website The Motley Fool, said: "It's inflation that investors should be guarding against." Like others, he is concerned that the "bail-out" measures adopted by governments across the world to kick-start the economy, could be storing up future inflationary pressures.

"For example the Government in the UK is now effectively printing money in a bid to ease the credit crisis. Mr Kuo said: "It's likely that once quantitative easing [the printing of money] permeates through the economy, we'll see the rate of inflation begin to rise again."

So what steps should investors be taking now to protect their portfolios?

Protecting against deflation
If you think that the British economy is heading into a protracted downturn akin to the "lost decade" Japan experienced in the Nineties then now is the time to play it safe.

In a period of prolonged depression and falling prices, equities will underperform, as company profits suffer. Instead, investors should look at government gilts and high-quality investment bonds, as these are likely to produce the best returns.

Juliet Schooling, the head of research at Chelsea Financial Services, said: "Gilts are considered the safest market instrument and can provide a safe haven in a deflationary environment. This is because the gilt will pay out a fixed rate of interest which will increase in value as prices fall."
Investors can buy gilts individually or through a fund. Ms Schooling recommends City Financial Strategic Gilt fund, currently yielding 3.33pc.

But Gavin Haynes, the managing director of Whitechurch Securities, said: "Deflationary concerns have pushed gilt prices up and yields have fallen to historically low levels. So unless you think we are entering a long-term deflationary environment, then they are starting to look expensive."

Although equities typically perform badly in deflationary conditions, Jason Collins, a multi manager from Ignis, said investors should not step out of the stock market completely.
"The emphasis should be on selecting 'winning companies'. Look at very defensive sectors that are not sensitive to the economic cycle".

He added that investors may also want to target "the strongest companies in more cyclical sectors that will take market share from the weaker players that fail".

He added: "Deflation is particularly bad for those with big debts and physical assets – so property values are likely to fall and the real value of your mortgage debt will increase."

Adrian Lowcock, senior investment adviser at Bestinvest, said: "In the current climate there are a number of steps investors can take which will benefit them if prices fall, but also make good sense for the long term."

Given that debt increases in real terms in periods of deflation, Mr Lowcock said investors should spare funds to reduce the size of their mortgage.

He pointed out that investors should not overlook cash savings. "With interest rates so low, cash savings can look unattractive. But remember if we enter a period of deflation then in real terms your money is growing by 3pc a year."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/5063248/Deflation-How-to-protect-your-portfolio.html

Deflation can be good, but now it's bad

From The TimesMarch 24, 2009

Deflation can be good, but now it's bad

Ian King, Deputy Business Editor


Deflation does not have to be bad. There are, it is generally accepted by economists, two types of deflation — one good, one bad.

Good deflation is the type that Britain enjoyed during the Victorian era. Prices fell for most of the 19th century, thanks to a “virtuous circle” in which higher demand led to greater profits, which led to greater investment, better productivity — mainly due to the spread of railways — and, in turn, lower prices. There was huge industrial expansion, the advance of mass production, the rise of the City of London and the advent of the large corporation as we know it today.

In the period between 1870 and 1896, wholesale prices fell by 50 per cent, while Britain’s economy grew, on average, by a staggering 4 per cent each year.

Good deflation was also a key factor in the US during the Roaring Twenties when technological advances — in mass electrification and car manufacture — led to huge increases in productivity.

The common factor was that productivity improved so rapidly it led to excessive supply — and hence lower prices.

From the mid-1990s onwards, it seemed reasonable to suppose that the world was in for a rerun of those happy times, with the advance of the internet, increasingly powerful microchips and the development of mass communications. This belief was given greater impetus with the emergence of China as the workshop of the world, churning out ever-cheaper goods in ever-greater quantity.

Unfortunately, in this instance, the virtuous circle was broken because that vast output, quite literally, required fuelling. China’s insatiable demand for oil, petrochemicals and other commodities fed through to inflation elsewhere in the world — eventually hampering demand for its goods.

Instead, there is now a danger that we are in for a period of “bad” deflation. Bad deflation, like good deflation, occurs when supply exceeds demand. The difference is that, while good deflation is caused by booming supply, bad deflation is caused by weak demand. This was the case during the Great Depression of the 1930s in the US and, more recently, in Japan.

Bad deflation sucks the life out of economies. Rather than a virtuous circle, the effect has been likened to a “negative feedback loop”, in which one piece of bad news leads to another. An example of this would be how consumers react to a fall in the stock markets — by cutting back their spending. This forces companies to slash the price of goods and services, leading to lower profits, and then to lower employment and a further reduction in spending.

The reason that most observers fear we are in an era of bad deflation is because of the vast amounts of debt now in the economy. That is particularly true of the US and Britain.

Just as inflation is good for people with large debts, such as homeowners with big mortgages, deflation is even more painful because the size of the debt becomes relatively bigger. That is why governments everywhere are spending vast amounts on trying to provide economic stimulus. Demand needs to be reintroduced to the world economy — and fast.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/article5962898.ece

The return of inflation?

The return of inflation?
Posted By: Edmund Conway at Mar 24, 2009 at 11:18:26 [General]

So, after all that, we're not in deflation. To general shock and amazement throughout the City, the Retail Price Index did not creep into negative territory last month, dropping instead from 0.1pc to zero.

Consumer Prince Index inflation, the measure targeted by the Bank of England, actually rose from 3pc to 3.2pc, meaning the Governor Mervyn King has had to write another letter of explanation to the Chancellor.

All of this is a bit of a nightmare for the Bank. Having already cut interest rates to near zero and embarked on quantitative easing - the most radical means of monetary policy available to a central bank - its main alibi had been that the UK was facing the serious threat of deflation. To have then to find yourself trying to explain why inflation is still above its 2pc target is not just embarrassing but undermining. After all, part of its job is to influence peoples' decisions on financial and economic matters, and having spent months warning about the risk of falling prices, now the figures seem to have proven them wrong, in the meantime at least.

Most economists believe (and I am inclined to agree) that this month's figures were a blip, and that deflation will inevitably follow in the coming months. After all, RPI may not be in negative territory yet, but at zero it is still at the lowest level since 1960. Likewise, almost all the other evidence in the economy - everything from pay cuts to falls in commodity prices - points towards falling rather than rising prices.


Indeed, in his letter to the Chancellor, which you can find here, alongside Alistair Darling's response, King himself says: "notwithstanding the inflation outturn for February, it is likely that over the next year CPI inflation will move below target, although the profile of inflation could be volatile, reflecting the reversal of the temporary change in VAT on CPI inflation."

But this increase in CPI is already prompting a few people to reconsider their positions on inflation (after all the consensus forecast was for fall to a 2.6pc). The fact is that not only did some of the volatile items' prices increase (things like petrol and food) but so did core inflation - which strips out these unpredictable items and is regarded as a more steady, reliable indication of what prices are doing. This is probably due to the weakness of the pound in recent months - sterling has depreciated by more than a quarter over the past 18 months, and this was bound at some point to feed through to higher domestic prices.

But what if - and it is a big if - the massive amount of medicine already ladelled into the UK economic system - the cut in rates from 5pc to 0.5pc, the extra cash pumped in by the Government, the fall in the pound and the Bank's decision to start creating money and buying up bonds - is starting to work already, counteracting the recession and boosting prices. What if that deflation threat so frequently mooted by the Bank and others, was far less severe than was ever the case? In that case it would have profound implications for monetary policy, meaning the Bank may have to reconsider its decision to spend up to £150bn on quantitative easing and exit this strategy even before it has properly got it underway.

There is a hint of this doubt in King's letter, which says: "At its next policy meeting the MPC will want to consider further the extent to which the balance of risks has changed in light of the latest inflation figure and all the other relevant data. In particular, in the context of the CPI data this month, the Committee will need to judge to what extent the main upside risk to the inflation outlook identified in the February Inflation Report - that there is greater pass-through of the exchange rate depreciation to inflation - is crystallising, or whether the inflation outturn reflects other factors."

I doubt, however, that this will change the Bank's fundamental position - that the UK is heading into a nasty recession (something that almost always goes hand in hand with falling prices), that the risk of debt deflation, the phenomenon which affected the US in the Great Depression, remains bigger than the risk of inflation being thrown up as a result of its remedies, and that it must keep rates low for some time.

King is currently appearing at the Treasury Select Committee, from which we'll have more later. As I post this, he's just blamed the fall in sterling for the increase in inflation - saying that this was "one of the upside risks" laid out in the Inflation Report last month.


0 (0 Ratings) Must Be logged in to bookmark content.[ 15 comments ]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edmund_conway/blog/2009/03/24/the_return_of_inflation

Deflation expected to return to UK for first time in 50 years

Deflation expected to return to UK for first time in 50 years



Deflation is expected to return to the UK for the first time in nearly 50 years with the announcement that prices are falling nationwide rather than increasing.

By Caroline Gammell
Last Updated: 9:26AM GMT 24 Mar 2009

George Buckley: George Buckley, Deutsche Bank's chief UK economist, told The Daily Telegraph that he is forecasting an RPI reading of -0.7 per cent





The retail price index (RPI) - which measures the average month-to-month change of the prices of goods and services - is thought to have slid into negative figures.

The last time the UK experienced deflation was in 1960 when Harold Macmillan was prime minister.

Inflation expected to fall as oil retreats and VAT cut kicks inThe widely expected downturn follows figures released by the Office for National Statistics in January which showed that RPI increased by just 0.1 per cent compared with the previous year.

Consensus forecasts by leading City economists suggest RPI fell -0.5 per cent in February, forced down by falling mortgage rates and rapidly decreasing house prices.

The latest RPI figures will be released by the ONS at 9.30am.

The Bank of England is worried about the effect deflation could have on indebted families.

It says families with high debts could fall prey to the debt deflation trap. This means that the cost of their debts, which are fixed, would rise compared to average prices throughout the economy.

While inflation erodes debts, deflation makes them relatively higher.

There are also fears that millions of public sector workers - teachers, nurses and council workers - could face pay freezes for the next three years as deflation takes hold.

Public sector pay, which accounts for about a quarter of all public spending, is tied to RPI.

George Buckley, Deutsche Bank's chief UK economist, told The Daily Telegraph that he is forecasting an RPI reading of -0.7 per cent, and believes it could get as low as -4 per cent over the summer months.

Asked if the negative reading will lead to pay freezes, he said: "That's certainly a possibility. You won't see anywhere near the increases in pay that we've been used to. But few are unlikely to see falling pay."

Economists at BNP Paribas warned over the weekend that prices in Britain will continue to fall for another two-and-a-half years.

The French bank's UK economist, Alan Clarke, said that he expected gross domestic product (GDP) to contract by more than four per cent this year, and deflation to linger through to 2012.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5041459/Deflation-expected-to-return-to-UK-for-first-time-in-50-years.html





Related Articles
David Cameron: Only Tories can bring order to financial markets
Millions face pay freeze as Britain enters deflation zone
Inflation to fall to lowest in nearly 50 years
UK staves off deflation as weak pound pushes up prices
Weak pound stops inflation falling below zero
Inflation expected to fall as oil retreats and VAT cut kicks in



Related Articles
The return of inflation?
Mervyn King's letter to the Chancellor
UK staves off deflation as weak pound pushes up prices
Global rally stalls in London after shock inflation rise
Millions face pay freeze as Britain enters deflation zone
Inflation to fall to lowest in nearly 50 years

Deflation: the winners and losers

From Times OnlineMarch 24, 2009

Deflation: the winners and losers
Times Online

— The biggest losers are easily identified. About 180,000 people have annuities linked to the retail prices index, according to the Association of British Insurers, and many of the providers of these, including big names such as AXA, Prudential and Standard Life, will automatically cut the income received on them in the event of deflation. Other providers, such as Norwich Union and Legal & General, have stated that payments will not fall but merely remain unchanged until the retail prices index begins rising again

— Savers whose rates are linked to the RPI also lose out, such as those who have bought products from National Savings & Investments

— Among the winners are people who have bought gilts — government IOUs — as these pay a fixed rate of interest, which is worth more when prices are falling

— Although it may not feel like it, anyone with money in the bank will be a winner. If prices are going into reverse, any bank account paying interest, however modest, is worth having

— Similarly, most people on state pensions can be regarded as winners. State pensions increase at the start of the tax year in line with where the RPI stood the previous September. Because the RPI was 5 per cent last September, it means that the weekly pension rises on April 6 from £90.70 to £95.24. In practice, the relative spending power of the state pension will vary according to each pensioner's personal rate of inflation, which — depending on council tax bills, for example — may exceed 5 per cent. If deflation continues until this September, pensioners will still get an increase, as the Government has pledged that state pensions will never rise by less than 2.5 per cent a year

— Some businesses will also benefit, again depending on their individual levels of deflation. If the costs of a business fall, then even if it is not raising prices for its customers, its margins will be improving. In reality, deflation is likely to hurt many businesses, as their costs are rising because of the collapse of sterling

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article5966409.ece


Related Links
Big freeze starts to hit public sector pay
Deflation can be good, but now it's bad
Shopping basket shows prices really are down

UK to remain in deflation trap until 2012, economists warn

UK to remain in deflation trap until 2012, economists warn
Britain will be mired in a deflation trap for years despite the radical efforts of the Bank of England to pump extra cash into the economy, economists have warned.

By Edmund Conway
Last Updated: 10:26PM GMT 21 Mar 2009

The forecast, by a team at BNP Paribas, states that prices in Britain will keep falling for at least another two-and-a-half years, as Britain suffers an apparently intractable bout of debt deflation.

The warning comes only days before official figures confirm this Tuesday that the Retail Price Index has dipped into negative territory for the first time in almost half a century.
It also follows a warning from the Bank itself that the UK is now exhibiting early signs of becoming stuck in debt deflation − the combination of falling prices and rising debt burdens that afflicted the US during the Great Depression.

But while many assume the combination of near-zero interest rates and a heavily-devalued pound will help prevent falling prices from becoming entrenched, and may stoke inflation, the BNP Paribas economists said they expected deflation to persist all the way until 2012. Furthermore, the fall in prices would be broad-based across the economy, pushing into the red not only the RPI but also the Consumer Price Index, which the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee targets

Alan Clarke, UK economist at BNP Paribas, said: "Our revised economic forecasts for the UK are the most pessimistic in the market. We expect GDP to contract by more than 4pc this year and by a further 1pc in 2010. We expect deflation to set in during 2011, even earlier were it not for the VAT hike [which will follow the temporary cut in the tax this year]."

"Over the medium term, we expect the unemployment rate to surge to above 10pc − well above neutral. This will exert significant downward pressure on inflation, turning negative in 2011."

The forecast is based largely on the bank's prediction that the unemployment rate will soar to 10.4pc of the workforce by 2011, depressing the wider economy and underlines the disparity between economists' expectations for the coming years.

The Office for National Statistics will on Tuesday announce that the annual rate of change in the RPI has dropped beneath zero for the first time since February 1960, most likely falling to -0.6pc. It is also likely to say that CPI inflation has fallen to around 2.5pc. The CPI does not include the effects of either house prices or mortgage interest payments, and so has been less affected by the falls in property values over the past year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/5028673/UK-to-remain-in-deflation-trap-until-2012-economists-warn.html

Related Articles
Economy may need further £90bn boost , MPC member warns
Britain showing signs of heading towards 1930s-style depression, says Bank
Cheaper rail fares as operators told to slash prices
Inflation to fall to lowest in nearly 50 years
Inflation expected to fall as oil retreats and VAT cut kicks in
The UK economy: an analysis and some predictions

Deflation: why is it so dangerous?

Deflation: why is it so dangerous?
With the economic news seemingly becoming worse by the day, there has been much talk about the possibility of deflation – a prolonged period of falling general prices.

By George Buckley
Last Updated: 11:35AM GMT 17 Mar 2009

But why would this be so bad? After all, surely deflation is good for households if it means that the cost of the goods and services is becoming cheaper?

There are a few reasons it's not that simple. First, prices tend to be influenced by the state of the economy. If demand is greater than the supply of goods and services then prices rise. If demand is weaker –as is the case at the moment – then prices can drop. So falling prices tell us something about the fragile shape of the economy.

A fall in prices is bad news for companies that make or sell the products we buy. Imagine a retailer having to cut prices to shift stock, but at the same time paying more for imported goods because of the fall in pound’s value. This causes profits to turn to losses, meaning some retailers will go to the wall, and many will cut staff.

Deflation, therefore, doesn’t just mean lower prices – it also means higher unemployment and lower wages. It will become much more difficult for those people who’ve lost their job or had to take a pay cut to continue repaying their debt.

Some might be forced to sell their house to pay off the mortgage – but the more people who do this, the more house prices may fall (causing negative equity). And if house prices fall that can be a blow to confidence leading to a weaker economy which in turn might perpetuate deflation. It is easy to see how a vicious cycle can develop.

Consider the situation in which we have deflation, and more importantly we think it is going to continue. There is, then, little incentive to spend money today – we may as well wait until tomorrow when prices will be lower. And tomorrow we might think the same again, deferring our purchase indefinitely.

This is what happened in Japan in the 1990s - deflation came, and shoppers disappeared. Economic growth turned to economic contraction, and we witnessed what became known as Japan's "lost decade". Following a brief interlude where growth returned, a second lost decade seems to be in the making.

Even worse was the Great Depression. In the 1930s share prices tumbled leading to an economic slump of epic proportions – and, of course, deflation and falling wages. The crash that led to that depression was caused by investors buying shares with borrowed money, pushing their prices up to ever unsustainable levels. This time round it was excesses in the housing market and the financial sector.

Governments are now trying to spend their way out of recession, attempting to fill in the gap left by households and firms. The Bank of England is helping too by bringing interest rates down to exceptionally low levels – making it less desirable to save and thereby encouraging spending.

It is still very uncertain as to how all of this stimulus will affect the economy. The pressing need is to avert a period of deflation, but the risk is that too much policy easing could cause exactly the opposite

George Buckley is chief UK economist at Deutsche Bank

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/5005277/Deflation-why-is-it-so-dangerous.html

Related Articles
Deflation is here, but 40pc struggle to pay their bills
Telegraph View: Imagine the Boxing Day bargains
Thomson Reuters shows bleak backdrop
Shoppers turn to cheap foods to save on grocery bills
Food crisis looms for Japan as prices rise

'Sell every asset except gilts'

'Sell every asset except gilts'
Conventional assets – even gold – are no good as hedges against the inevitable deflation, says one asset manager.

By David Kauders
Last Updated: 12:17PM GMT 11 Mar 2009

At the end of last week, gilt prices soared and yields fell again. The market reacted positively to the Bank of England's announcement of quantitative easing. Yet in the preceding days and weeks the market had been spooked by concerns that the bail-outs would create inflation. Why the sudden change in sentiment?

It has long been our view that inflation scares have been seriously overstated and the real risk is deflation. Deflation occurs when a shrinking economy leaves businesses and consumers who have already borrowed heavily earning less and therefore unable to afford their existing debts.

There is the danger of a downward spiral caused by less income to pay interest. This is what the authorities are trying to avoid.

In a deflationary environment, only fixed-coupon gilts prosper: even index-linked stocks are ineffective. This is because the real rate of interest (nominal interest less inflation) has historically been around 2pc to 3pc for centuries.

If prices are falling rather than rising, fixed-coupon gilts gain in value, whereas the indexation formula for index-linked gilts indexes downwards with no floor. Other asset classes such as shares, property and many commodities depend on the continued take-up of more credit – which is why they did so well for many years.

As the credit crunch proceeded, governments introduced more and more bail-outs to keep banks lending. Real money, which has to be raised by increased taxation or by selling new gilts, was spent. This gave rise to fears that excess supply would depress gilt prices. Yet events show that the fears were mistaken. There are a number of reasons for gilt prices rising as supply expands:

• The biggest beneficiary of lower interest rates is government, as lower rates cut the cost of servicing the national debt;
• Pension funds are willing buyers and therefore absorb any supply offered to them;
• Risk elsewhere leads to a flight to quality and safety, irrespective of price.
• In addition, the Treasury have been selling new gilts to the market through the Debt Management Office's auction programme in order to fund the Government's spending. This takes cash out of the economy, yet the Bank of England wants to buy gilts back to put public money into the economy.
  
  

If the policy works it may ameliorate the recession, but the result is that the Bank of England counteracts the effect of the Treasury's extra supply of gilts.

Being realistic, there are many reasons why this quantitative easing may be of only cosmetic effect: why should banks lend to over-indebted businesses and consumers? What if they just run down their derivatives positions further?

Banks and building societies have to hold capital in reserve to ensure they can meet any losses. Historically, they had significant holdings in gilts and deposits at the Bank of England, but over the past 30 years standards were relaxed and other types of debt security were brought into those reserves.

Now they are rediscovering the advantages of having highly saleable assets such as gilts in their core capital and are therefore willing buyers of government bonds. Such bank purchases are significant, just as pension funds will be material buyers when they opt for certainty instead of risk to stem their losses in stock markets.

These large investors are the only ones who can sell to the Bank of England, yet they have good reasons for being net buyers.

However you look at it, institutional demand is increasing no matter what the supply of gilts. Nearly 20 years ago, in the recession of the early 1990s, the Government sold more gilts and prices rose (yields fell), in that case from around 13pc in 1990 to around 9pc in 1993. Inflation then was around 10pc and about to fall sharply. Notice the parallels as inflation now threatens to turn into deflation, the Government issues more gilts and prices rise again.

Investors have been pursuing property and gold for protection against financial risk. But property is an inflation hedge, not a deflation hedge, since its price level depends on the continued supply of credit.

There are also demographic factors that have favoured property in the postwar years but now turn against it: the lower birth rate, extensive owner occupation and the shift from net immigration to net emigration. Add this to the current financial pressure, and you can see why property is no longer a viable investment.

As for gold, it is the ultimate inflation hedge, since easy money provides the fuel for more people to buy it. But it is not a deflation hedge, for one simple reason. No currency is exchangeable into gold and no government is going to wreck its country's economy by adopting a gold standard.

This explains why the gold price perks up occasionally then always slips back again. The safest asset in the financial system is the promise of government to honour its own debt.

Private investors need to go with the flow. Investing in stock markets, like property, is proving singularly unrewarding at present. We believe the bear markets have much further to run before shares and property are cheap enough to buy again.

Since income offered by gilts is still above that earned from many bank accounts and there is a continuing flight to quality, gilt prices must go on rising until this deflation is over.

Investors should change to a gilt-only strategy to preserve capital and income. This way, they will have the cash to buy the bargains when stock markets offer them.

David Kauders is a partner at Kauders Portfolio Management.

Related Articles
Inflation will kill the gilt rally in the end
'Inflation will beat deflation and gold will hit $3,000'
Retirement plans of millions of Britons at risk
Comment: Who are the losers when inflation disappears?
Stock market: The Bear's view on shares
New Star peers into the future

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/4969399/Sell-every-asset-except-gilts.html

When Consumers Cut Back: An Object Lesson From Japan

When Consumers Cut Back: An Object Lesson From Japan

By HIROKO TABUCHI

Published: February 21, 2009

TOKYO — As recession-wary Americans adapt to a new frugality, Japan offers a peek at how thrift can take lasting hold of a consumer society, to disastrous effect.

Multimedia
Graphic
In Japan, Neither Spending Nor Saving

The economic malaise that plagued Japan from the 1990s until the early 2000s brought stunted wages and depressed stock prices, turning free-spending consumers into misers and making them dead weight on Japan’s economy.
Today, years after the recovery, even well-off Japanese households use old bath water to do laundry, a popular way to save on utility bills. Sales of whiskey, the favorite drink among moneyed Tokyoites in the booming ’80s, have fallen to a fifth of their peak. And the nation is losing interest in cars; sales have fallen by half since 1990.
The Takigasaki family in the Tokyo suburb of Nakano goes further to save a yen or two. Although the family has a comfortable nest egg, Hiroko Takigasaki carefully rations her vegetables. When she goes through too many in a given week, she reverts to her cost-saving standby: cabbage stew.
“You can make almost anything with some cabbage, and perhaps some potato,” says Mrs. Takigasaki, 49, who works part time at a home for people with disabilities.
Her husband has a well-paying job with the electronics giant Fujitsu, but “I don’t know when the ax will drop,” she says. “Really, we need to save much, much more.”
Japan eventually pulled itself out of the Lost Decade of the 1990s, thanks in part to a boom in exports to the United States and China. But even as the economy expanded, shell-shocked consumers refused to spend. Between 2001 and 2007, per-capita consumer spending rose only 0.2 percent.
Now, as exports dry up amid a worldwide collapse in demand, Japan’s economy is in free-fall because it cannot rely on domestic consumption to pick up the slack.
In the last three months of 2008, Japan’s economy shrank at an annualized rate of 12.7 percent, the sharpest decline since the oil shocks of the 1970s.
“Japan is so dependent on exports that when overseas markets slow down, Japan’s economy teeters on collapse,” said Hideo Kumano, an economist at the Dai-ichi Life Research Institute. “On the surface, Japan looked like it had recovered from its Lost Decade of the 1990s. But Japan in fact entered a second Lost Decade — that of lost consumption.”
The Japanese have had some good reasons to scale back spending.
Perhaps most important, the average worker’s paycheck has shrunk in recent years, even after companies rebounded and bolstered their profits.
That discrepancy is the result of aggressive cost-cutting on the part of Japanese exporters like Toyota and Sony. They, like American companies now, have sought to fend off cutthroat competition from companies in emerging economies like South Korea and Taiwan, where labor costs are low.
To better compete, companies slashed jobs and wages, replacing much of their work force with temporary workers who had no job security and fewer benefits. Nontraditional workers now make up more than a third of Japan’s labor force.
Younger people are feeling the brunt of that shift. Some 48 percent of workers age 24 or younger are temps. These workers, who came of age during a tough job market, tend to shun conspicuous consumption.
They tend to be uninterested in cars; a survey last year by the business daily Nikkei found that only 25 percent of Japanese men in their 20s wanted a car, down from 48 percent in 2000, contributing to the slump in sales.
Young Japanese women even seem to be losing their once- insatiable thirst for foreign fashion. Louis Vuitton, for example, reported a 10 percent drop in its sales in Japan in 2008.
“I’m not interested in big spending,” says Risa Masaki, 20, a college student in Tokyo and a neighbor of the Takigasakis. “I just want a humble life.”
Japan’s aging population is not helping consumption. Businesses had hoped that baby boomers — the generation that reaped the benefits of Japan’s postwar breakneck economic growth — would splurge their lifetime savings upon retirement, which began en masse in 2007. But that has not happened at the scale that companies had hoped.
Economists blame this slow spending on widespread distrust of Japan’s pension system, which is buckling under the weight of one of the world’s most rapidly aging societies. That could serve as a warning for the United States, where workers’ 401(k)’s have been ravaged by declining stocks, pensions are disappearing, and the long-term solvency of the Social Security system is in question.
“My husband is retiring in five years, and I’m very concerned,” says Ms. Masaki’s mother, Naoko, 52. She says it is no relief that her husband, a public servant, can expect a hefty retirement package; pension payments could fall, and she has two unmarried children to worry about.
“I want him to find another job, and work as long as he’s able,” Mrs. Masaki says. “We must be ready to fend for ourselves.”
Economic stimulus programs like the one President Obama signed into law last week have been hampered in Japan by deflation, the downward spiral of prices and wages that occurs when consumers hold down spending — in part because they expect goods to be cheaper in the future.
Economists say deflation could interfere with the two trillion yen ($21 billion) in cash handouts that the Japanese government is planning, because consumers might save the extra money on the hunch that it will be more valuable in the future than it is now.
The same fear grips many economists and policymakers in the United States. “Deflation is a real risk facing the economy,” President Obama’s chief economic adviser, Lawrence H. Summers, told reporters this month.
Hiromi Kobayashi, 38, a Tokyo homemaker, has taken to sewing children’s ballet clothes at home to supplement income from her husband’s job at a movie distribution company. The family has not gone on vacation in two years and still watches a cathode-ray tube TV. Mrs. Kobayashi has her eye on a flat-panel TV but is holding off.
“I’m going to find a bargain, then wait until it gets even cheaper,” she says.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/business/worldbusiness/22japan.html?em

Ken Rogoff says Fed needs to set inflation target of 6pc to help ease crisis

Ken Rogoff says Fed needs to set inflation target of 6pc to help ease crisis
A leading US economist has called on the Federal Reserve to target an inflation rate of 5pc to 6pc over the next two years to erode the debt burden and slow the pace of job losses.

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, International Business Editor
Last Updated: 6:04AM GMT 20 Feb 2009

Professor Kenneth Rogoff, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, said the threat of debt deflation called for revolutionary measures as an insurance policy.

"Excess inflation right now would help ameliorate the problem. For that reason, it would be far better to have 5pc to 6pc inflation for a couple of years than to have 2pc to 3pc deflation," he told the Central Banking Journal. The Fed has shifted tentatively to an inflation target, but one anchored nearer "stability".

A number of economists have begun to make similar calls for a radical shift to deliberate monetary debasement, although few have gone as far as suggesting 6pc.

Such proposals cause a furious political reaction because they amount to a forced shift in wealth from savers to debtors.

Prof Rogoff – one of the few economists who recognised the gravity of this crisis early on – admits that his policy is fraught with danger because it could lead to an overshoot down the road, "ending up with 200pc inflation". But there may be no choice at a time when the financial system is "melting down". The Bank of Japan failed to act fast enough in the 1990s because it was "paralysed by fear" that aggressive monetary stimulus would get out of hand.

Prof Rogoff said big fiscal packages have a role to play in backing up a zero interest rate policy and ensuring that consumption does not collapse as house prices plummet, but the key is "determined monetary policy".

There are no good options at this late stage after years of errors. Standard monetary relationships have broken down. "Policy is in effect flying blind," he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/4701569/Ken-Rogoff-says-Fed-needs-to-set-inflation-target-of-6pc-to-help-ease-crisis.html

The market gives a thumbs-up to printing money

The market gives a thumbs-up to printing money
Posted By: Edmund Conway at Feb 18, 2009 at 19:58:27 [General]

What would you expect a currency to do when a central bank admits it is about to start printing money imminently? The answer you'll find in the textbooks is pretty clear: it will fall, and fall fast. Just look at Zimbabwe.

But that's precisely the opposite of what happened this morning when the Bank of England said that within weeks it will have the printing presses roaring away. In fact, as you can see from the graph here, after the Bank announced this in its Monetary Policy Committee minutes at around 9.30, people started buying, rather than selling, sterling. Why? What on earth has happened in the topsy-turvy world of currencies that makes traders believe a good investment is a currency that is about to become all the more plentiful? Has everyone lost their senses?



The answer is intriguing, and helps underline precisely how counterintuitive is the policy challenge we face in this economic crisis. People are buying sterling not out of economic ignorance or bloody-mindedness but as a vote of confidence in the Bank of England's economic policy. In other words, they believe quantitative easing - the technical term for printing money - will, in the long run, bring the economy back to health, even if in the short run it could devalue sterling.

Meanwhile, the market is punishing the euro (against which I plotted the pound in this chart) because of the European Central Bank's neanderthal approach to monetary policy. Of all the central banks they are the most reluctant to slash interest rates and start up the presses. This could be a big mistake.

The explanation for this, by the way, goes back to the genesis of each continent's respective central bank. The ECB is the spawn of the German Bundesbank. Its history was shaped by the horrific experience of Weimar Germany's hyperinflation of the 1920s, so it is naturally inclined to fear the worst about inflation. The Federal Reserve's big bugbear, on the other hand is deflation, since that was what afflicted the US in the 1930s.

Anyway, the point is that the market believes (today anyway) that the Federal Reserve, which is already well down the road towards money-printing, and the Bank of England are right, and that the ECB is wrong. I happen to agree.

Quantitative easing is a hard sell - I know that from your comments whenever I write approvingly about it! But if handled properly I genuinely believe it could help prevent this from turning into the recession to end all recessions.

Whether you agree with me or not about that, the one thing we can surely all agree on is that, should the Bank of England pursue this course, it must, must be ready to raised interest rates and pull money back out of the economy when it looks as if deflation has really been averted.

You can count on us at the Telegraph to do our best to make sure it does.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edmund_conway/blog/2009/02/18/the_market_gives_a_thumbsup_to_printing_money

What is deflation?

Q&A: What is deflation?
Gary Duncan

What is deflation?

The dreaded “D” word, one of the most feared economic blights, refers to sustained falls in prices in the economy for goods and services.

Don't we already have falling prices for some products?

Yes. For goods such as many types of clothing, Britain has got used to steadily cheaper prices as a result of intense high street competition and cheap imports from Asia. But deflation is different, meaning falls in prices more or less across the board.

But that sounds good. What's the problem?

The trend can sound like a money-saving bonanza. A short-lived burst of deflation for only a few months might end up like that and need not be a disaster. Problems start when consumers collectively curb spending, constantly waiting for ever-cheaper prices. In turn, this sucks the lifeblood of demand from the economy. With spending falling sharply, businesses sell less and less and are forced to cut wages and lay off staff — leading to even less spending, lower demand and sharper falls in prices. A vicious, downward spiral takes hold that can spell deep and prolonged recession. Once deflation sets in, it can be tough to reverse it, as negative effects feed on themselves. For example, if interest rates have been cut sharply to try to rekindle spending, then once they fall to zero it is impossible to cut them further and, after factoring in falling prices, this means that real interest rates are still higher than zero.

Are there any other effects?

Unfortunately, yes. Debt is a headache. Where prices and incomes generally are falling in a bout of deflation, this means that the real value of people's debts, relative to falling incomes, is rising. So debts become an ever bigger burden, stretching the time that is needed to pay them off to longer periods. This is known as “debt deflation”. In an economy such as Britain's, where households have the highest burden of debt of any leading economy, it poses a particularly severe danger.

How can economies escape?

With great difficulty. Deflation is like quicksand. Once in it, it is very difficult to escape the mire. Solutions to “reflate” the economy are found in flooding the financial system with ultra-cheap money. This can be done by governments printing money to give away in tax cuts, although this risks irreversible damage to a country's finances, or by a central bank buying up assets from banks, effectively handing them extremely cheap cash.

Is deflation likely to take hold now?

There is a significant danger. Headline inflation in the United States could turn negative as soon as this week, after a huge reversal of last year's surge in fuel prices. In Britain, the Bank has said that it expects inflation on some measures to fall into negative territory for at least a few months. This may fall short of full-blown deflation, but will magnify the danger of it.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article5750994.ece

The Age of Deflation

February 17, 2009

The Age of Deflation
A sustained fall in prices would cause immense economic disruption and hardship; policymakers are right to fear it and to focus all efforts on preventing it .

Figures released this week in the UK and the US are likely to confirm that the annual rate of inflation is decelerating. On some measures, inflation might even turn negative. Lower prices - not just weaker inflation - will sound like good news to households where incomes have been squeezed by tax rises and higher bills. But a sustained period of falling prices (deflation) would have huge economic costs.

While the risk that deflation will take hold of the Western economies is small, it is not trivial. The prospect is powerfully exercising the minds of central bankers and explains the urgency with which the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve have cut interest rates. Their apprehension is justified: deflation would be the worst of outcomes for the global economy.

In Europe and America, the possibility of deflation goes against all postwar experience. During the Second World War, policymakers worried that the postwar economy would suffer prolonged falls in prices as troops were demobilised and capacity constraints were eased. Yet the enduring problem proved instead to be inflation. J.M. Keynes was the great intellectual influence on Western policy till the mid-1970s, yet his writings contained little on countering inflation beyond the view that expansionary policies should be relaxed before full employment had been achieved.

In practice, full employment, upward pressure on wages and earnings, and the willingness of governments to engage in deficit financing caused a build-up in inflationary pressures. Only with punishingly high interest rates and recession did central banks manage to tame inflation in the early 1980s. Since then, and especially since the mid-1990s, inflationary conditions have been broadly benign. Cheap imports from China helped to dampen inflation and allowed central banks to keep interest rates low.

Unfortunately, easy monetary policy also stimulated an unsustainable boom in asset prices and an irresponsible expansion of credit. The collapse of the housing market bubble and the credit crunch are now pulling the global economy down into recession. Inflation is decelerating sharply, helped by falls in commodity prices.

In the UK, the annual rate of consumer price inflation - the measure that the Government targets - declined a full point to 3.1 per cent in December. The Bank of England expects the figure to fall below 1 per cent this year. Annual inflation as measured by the retail price index, which includes mortgage repayments, has been falling even more rapidly and is approaching its lowest level since 1960.

A short period of falling prices would do little damage. Consumers are used to seeing the prices of some items fall consistently - particularly in electronic goods, as computing power has become much cheaper. But a long period of general price falls, as happened in Japan in the 1990s, would be damaging. Consumers would postpone purchases, as they would be able to buy goods more cheaply in a year or two. Employment and investment would collapse. Stock prices would fall as corporate earnings would contract. Most damaging, households with debt - either mortgage debt or unsecured loans - would suffer intense hardship. Adjusted for inflation, the value of their debt burden would rise. Deflation would cause hardship, eviction and widespread corporate and personal bankruptcy.

This is the risk, if not yet prospect, that central banks now contend with. Previous deflations are almost beyond living memory. The Great Depression was marked by hardship and hunger. The Long Depression of 1873-96 generated international friction, trade warfare and financial panic. These precedents are uniformly terrible; the stakes are extremely high.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article5748227.ece

The UK economy: an analysis and some predictions

The UK economy: an analysis and some predictions

The Daily Telegraphy's Economics Editor Edmund Conway offers an analysis of the current position of the UK's economy and some predictions for what lies ahead.

By Edmund Conway
Last Updated: 7:36PM GMT 23 Jan 2009
Comments 0 Comment on this article

There are two possible paths the UK economy could take in the coming years. Neither will be pretty; both involve a recession. But whereas one path sees the UK recover from the current slump within around a year, the other foretells a depression that lasts for many years, effectively lopping a major chunk of wealth off the size of the UK economy. No-one can predict with any degree of accuracy which one is more likely, but the dismal gross domestic product figures from the Office for National Statistics yesterday have, sadly, made the latter outcome that bit more likely.

What is relatively simple is to predict the next year for the economy.

As companies' profits continue to shrink, unemployment will climb higher still. The jobless total, which is just below the 2 million mark, will rise towards 3 million by the end of the year, and will probably edge higher still after that. This will ensure that while the recession seems at this moment to be a relatively abstract term for most Britons, by 2010 it will be a very real social issue.

House prices will continue to fall, with 2009 being similarly gloomy for the property market; as values drop many hundreds of thousands more homeowners will find themselves in negative equity, where the value of their home is worth less than their mortgage. This does not matter for those who retain their jobs, but the rise in redundancies means many simply won't have the luxury of remaining in their home until its price rises back above their mortgage.

The big question, however, concerns 2010.

By then, the Bank of England will most likely have cut interest rates to zero and will be actively pumping cash into the economy. By then, such a move will seem less controversial than it does now, since deflation will be the biggest threat - not inflation. But the threat is that the UK becomes trapped in a deflationary spiral, with prices falling faster and faster, and trapping more families in negative equity. Such spirals can be even more dangerous and intractable than bouts of hyperinflation. That, after all, was what happened in the 1930s; that is the depression trap that the UK faces.
The Bank of England believes that it has the power to prevent such an eventuality. The problem is that no central bank has ever successfully warded off a deflationary depression before. Ask Japan: it is still stuck on a depression that has lasted for longer than a decade.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/4326173/The-UK-economy-an-analysis-and-some-predictions.html

****Deflation Survival Briefing

Gala Issue: Biggest Sea Change of Our Lifetime! by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D.



Dear,
The Fed, the Treasury and all major governments on the planet are throwing the kitchen sink at this debt crisis. But their efforts are being overwhelmed by a monumental sea change — the shift from rising prices to falling prices, from booming asset values to crashing asset values, from wealth creation to wealth destruction, from inflation to deflation.



For my entire lifetime, and probably yours as well, we have been living with inflation — sometimes tame, sometimes rampant — but consistently eroding the purchasing power of our dollar.Inflation pervaded every money decision we made or thought about making, every retirement plan or business model. Inflation was factored into our leases, our employment contracts, our budgets, our investment programs.



Now, all of that is changing; and it's doing so dramatically! Suddenly, the polar opposite of inflation is taking hold in America: Deflation!


Suddenly, prices are plummeting — not just for real estate, but also for automobiles, appliances, clothing and gasoline. From peaks reached just a few months ago to the latest bottoms, the price of oil has plunged 73% ... copper has fallen 66% ... lead and nickel are down 73% ... platinum is down 66% ... and wheat is off 64%.



Even the government's slow-to-change, lagging index of inflation — the CPI — has caved in to deflation, falling by the most since the government first introduced the index in 1946. These are not numbers that denote less inflation. They are hard evidence of outright deflation! This is crucial for you: If you continue investing as you did in inflationary times, you risk losing almost everything. However, if you acknowledge this historic shift and make the right moves now, you'll have the opportunity to build substantial wealth. This inflation-deflation switch is turning the entire world of investments upside down and inside out.
It means you must consider the grave new dangers deflation brings your portfolio and, at the same time, the unique new opportunities deflation gives you to grow your wealth. This past week, during our Deflation Survival Briefing, I covered both topics with Jack Crooks, the only currency expert I'm aware of who, unlike his peers, not only warned unambiguously about deflation but also has a unique way to profit from the deflation. I assume you attended the event online from start to finish. At times, however, the sound may have been unclear, and I apologize. So here's an edited transcript for your convenience. It's a double-length gala issue especially for you, my way of underscoring the vital importance of this sea change.



Deflation Survival Briefingwith Martin D. Weiss and Jack Crooks(Edited Transcript)
Martin Weiss: Jack, the division of labor I've mapped out is this: I will focus on the dangers and protective strategies; you can focus on the opportunities and profit strategies.



Jack Crooks: That makes sense, but I think it's pretty obvious what the dangers are.

Martin: Specifically, you're referring to ...

Jack: Losing money. Losing a lot of money. Deflation means most asset prices go down. When asset prices go down, anyone who owns those assets loses money. It's that simple.

Martin: What most people don't seem to grasp is how much money — the sheer magnitude of the losses. But the Fed just released the numbers, and I want to show them to you. I want you to see for yourself the amazing drama that literally bursts from these pages. On the Web, just go to Flow of Funds, pdf page 113. From this table, I've pulled out the main numbers to walk you through this step by step, because it's probably the most important set of facts you've seen — or will see — for a long time:
The Fed tracks five key sectors that go into household wealth: real estate, corporate equities, mutual fund shares, life insurance and pension fund reserves, plus equity in noncorporate businesses. Now let me show you how the wealth destruction is spreading throughout the U.S. economy. First quarter 2007: Every single wealth sector is still growing, except one — real estate. This $53 billion loss in real estate is a time and place that will go down in history as the great turning point of our era.Second quarter 2007: Another $190 billion in real estate wealth destroyed. Third quarter 2007: Households suffer a whopping $496 billion in losses — nearly 10 times as much as in the first quarter.Fourth quarter 2007: The wealth destruction spreads to nearly all other sectors. Households lose $708 billion in real estate, the most in history. Plus, they lose $377 billion in stocks, $145 billion in mutual funds, $265 billion in their life insurance and pension reserves.First quarter 2008: The carnage deepens. Households lose $911 billion in stocks, $297 billion in mutual funds and $832 billion in insurance and pension fund reserves. Plus, the losses spread to the last major sector, equity in noncorporate businesses. Second quarter 2008: The Bush economic stimulus package kicks in, and it slows down the pace a bit. But the hemorrhaging continues. Not one single sector recovers.Third quarter 2008: Earth-shattering losses across the board, with households losing

...ANOTHER $647 billion in real estate
$922 billion in corporate equities
$523 billion in mutual funds
$653 billion in insurance and pension fund reserves
$128 billion in noncorporate businesses

Grand total: Nearly $2.9 trillion in losses — the worst in recorded history.

Grand total lost over the past year: $7.2 trillion.

Jack: And this is not just a bunch of numbers. It's a hard-nosed reality that almost everyone is up against.

Martin: Absolutely! At the peak of the housing boom, one of our associates had his home appraised at $1.4 million. Three weeks ago, he had it appraised again and it was down around $700,000. That's a 50% decline. And it's not just the high end of the market. In May 2005, another home in our area sold for $175,000; now it's listed at Realtor.com for only $64,000.

Jack: People think that since home values have already fallen so far, they must be near a bottom.

Martin: I don't agree with that view. Most of the price declines we've seen so far merely represent a recognition that the peak prices of the mid-2000s were a fantasy built upon "Frankenstein Financing" — wildly speculative credit terms such as option ARMs and liar loans. The hard-core declines in housing, driven by basic things like recession and unemployment, are just now getting under way.

Jack: How much further do you see home prices falling?

Martin: My personal opinion is that that over half of the declines are still ahead. That applies not only to housing, but also to commercial properties; not only to real estate, but also to stocks and other assets. Consumer prices just began to fall in October. Outright contractions in the economy are just now getting under way. Deflation is still in its early stages. The wealth destruction has a long way to go.
Jack: You call this wealth destruction and I don't deny the validity of that term. But another way to describe it is rampant deflation. Deflation in the value of real estate and other investments, deflation in energy, deflation at the car dealer and deflation at every mall. In each and every sector that you've described, the U.S. dollar buys more.
Martin: That's the positive side of the story. But whatever you call it, these numbers don't lie. You can see with your own eyes that it's massive and that it's spreading throughout the entire economy.
Jack: Martin, all this raises some urgent questions in my mind and probably in the minds of our readers as well. First, can the government offset this massive destruction of wealth with more bailouts, more Fed actions and gigantic economic stimulus packages? Martin: They can buy some time or they can slow down the process temporarily, as they did in the second quarter of 2008, for example. But still, my answer is a flat NO! Not even Washington can print enough money fast enough to halt this deflationary spiral; it's just too huge. And all the printing press money in the world won't do much if it's not lent or spent. Bottom line: No matter which companies Washington bails out, this is a house of cards. It's coming down. And you must get out if its way.
Jack: Still, a lot of people have big expectations for President-elect Obama's stimulus package starting next year.
Martin: The highest estimates for the Obama stimulus package are $1 trillion. But even if it's that big, it's still small in contrast to the wealth destruction we're already seeing. And it's going to take a couple of years before all of that money reaches Americans. By that time, trillions more in wealth could be lost.
Jack: Every economist I read likes to leave some wiggle room for future butt-covering, just in case they turn out to be wrong. But you're not pulling any punches, are you? Why is that?Martin: It's not needed in this situation — because of the sheer enormity and speed of the wealth destruction: $7.2 trillion just through over the past year. In contrast, the Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP) is $700 billion. So these losses are already ten times more than the entire bailout program.
Let's compare how much is being lost vs. what the government is doing to offset it. Here's the progression we just saw:
$1.5 trillion lost in the fourth quarter of 2007
$2.7 trillion lost in the first quarter of 2008
$630 billion lost in the second quarter of 2008
$2.9 trillion in the third quarter
Now, let me demonstrate why the government's efforts are unable to offset this wealth destruction. Congress has authorized $700 billion for TARP. But the Treasury Department reports that in the fourth quarter, only $330 billion has been committed so far.
Jack: Committed or actually disbursed?
Martin: Committed.
Jack: The ol' check-in-the-mail routine, eh?
Martin: Yes. But let's assume the $330 billion is already at the banks. And let's say that in the first quarter of 2009, they are able to disburse all of the rest. That's still minuscule in comparison to the wealth destruction.
Jack: Meanwhile, the wealth destruction continues.
Martin: Right. We don't know how much. But let's assume the wealth destruction does not decelerate or accelerate. Let's just assume it continues at the same pace.
Here's what it would look like. Moreover, most of the money being funneled to the banks is not reaching consumers and businesses. Instead, it's sitting idle at the banks, to rebuild their capital, to try to offset all the losses they've sustained.
Jack: How much of the TARP money are the banks actually lending out?
Martin: We don't know.
Jack: Isn't this why Congress is so ticked off, trying to find a way to force the banks to lend out the TARP money?
Martin: Yes. But it's a tough sell. The banks are going broke. They're being asked to lend it to borrowers, who they fear will also go broke. So the resistance is great. But even if you assume that Congress can force the Treasury Department to, in turn, force the banks to loan out some fraction of the TARP money, it would still be only a fraction of the total TARP funds.
Jack: A drop in the bucket.
Martin: Absolutely! The huge red areas in this chart represent the tremendous power of deflation. The small black areas represent the impotence of government to offset the deflation.

The power of deflation is hundreds of times larger than the government's ability to counteract it. This is why the U.S. government was not able to prevent deflation in the 1930s. And it's also why the Japanese government was unable to prevent its deflation in the 1990s.
Jack: Still, most people think the government can just print more money at will. They're now talking about a total bill of $8.5 trillion. Your numbers don't seem to account for that.
Martin: Because those bigger numbers are almost entirely guarantees and swaps — not net new money added to the economy. Plus, please bear in mind one more thing: The wealth destruction we've been discussing today does not include the losses by financial institutions, corporations and governments.
Jack: Good point. But let me go to the second major question I get from readers: What's causing this and when will it end?
Martin: What's perpetuating the deflation is excess debts. Look. Debts were usually bearable. As long as people had the income to make their payments — or as long as they could borrow from Peter to pay Paul — they could keep piling up more debt, and life went on. Deflation alone is also not so bad. It makes homes more affordable, college education more accessible, and basic necessities of life cheaper.
Jack: But when you put debts and deflation together
...Martin: That's when things fall apart! That's when you get not only wealth destruction but DEBT destruction.
Jack: And we have evidence of that as well, I presume.
Martin: Yes, undeniable, smoking-gun evidence. For decades, we've almost always seen more debt piled up quarter after quarter, year after year. But then, beginning in the third quarter of 2007, all that changed. For the first time, we saw massive debt liquidation — debt destruction. It started in the commercial paper market, where corporations issue short-term corporate IOUs to borrow in massive amounts: In the third quarter of 2007, instead of growing as it almost always has, commercial paper was being liquidated at a rapid pace. That was the canary in the coal mine.
Jack: And now?
Martin: Now the debt liquidation has spread: In addition to the liquidation of commercial paper, we're seeing massive debt liquidation in mortgages and corporate bonds.Jack: How big?
Martin: The biggest ever in recorded history. Look at mortgages! The Fed reports how much in new mortgages are created each quarter at an annual rate. Ever since you and I were born, all we've even seen is net new growth in mortgages. That's how it was when we were growing up, that's how it was in recent years, and that's what we saw in the third quarter of 2007. See?
Jack: $1,005 billion.
Martin: Yes. Net net, after all mortgage paydowns, new mortgages were added at the rate of $1,005 billion per year. Almost the same in the fourth quarter of 2007. But then look: First quarter 2008 — $539 billion. Second quarter 2008 — new mortgages begin to vanish from the market. Yet, up until this point, we're just talking about a credit crunch.
Jack: In other words, less new credit.
Martin: Yes, and that's already a powerful deflationary force: Most people can't get mortgages. So they can't buy. Since there are few buyers, prices fall. That's when people think: "This is terrible. It couldn't possibly get any worse."
Jack: But it does, doesn't it?
Martin: Dramatically worse: In third quarter of 2008, the volume of mortgages going bad is so big and the volume of new mortgages being created is so small, we have a net decline in mortgages outstanding. For the first time in recorded history, we have a net destruction of debts in this sector. This is far worse than a credit crunch. It is a DEBT COLLAPSE, an unprecedented, unstoppable deflationary force.
The same kind of debt collapse also hits corporate bonds. Third quarter of 2007 — no problem. New bonds are issued at the annual rate of nearly $1,481 billion per year.Fourth quarter of 2007 — big decline, to $821 billion.
Jack: Credit crunch begins to hit.
Martin: Exactly. First and second quarters of 2008 — credit crunch hits even harder. Third quarter of 2008 — debt collapse strikes! It's the biggest net reduction of corporate bonds in recorded history, running at the annual rate of $755 billion (red bar in chart). Again, one of the most powerful deflationary forces of all time!
Jack: So what's the next stage?
Martin: A chain reaction of corporate bankruptcies.
Jack: But it looks like they're going to save companies like General Motors and Chrysler.
Martin: Even if they do, they cannot save hundreds of thousands of smaller and medium-sized companies that are going bankrupt all over the country ... tens of thousands of municipalities and states running out of money ... tens of millions of Americans who have gotten smacked with the trillions in losses I've just showed you in the household sector.
This wealth destruction and debt liquidation is classic; and despite all the government intervention, it is fundamentally very similar to the collapse we saw in 1929 and the early 1930s.
Jack: But many people believe the 1930s Depression was caused by the failure of the federal government to fight the decline. This time, they say, the government is doing precisely the opposite.
Martin: In reality, America's First Great Depression wasn't caused by what the government failed to do to stop it. Rather, it was largely caused by all the wild things the government did do to create the superboom in the Roaring '20s that preceded it. They dished out money to banks like candy. They let banks loan money to brokers without restraint. And they encouraged brokers to hand it off to stock market speculators with 10% margin. But if you want to see what happens when a government intervenes aggressively after a bust, just look at Japan since 1990. Japan lowered interest rates to zero, just like the Fed is doing today. Japan bailed out banks, brokerage firms and insurance companies, much like the Fed is doing here. Japan embarked on massive public works projects, much like President-elect Obama is proposing now.
But it did not end the deflation. And it did not prevent their stock market from making brand-new lows this year. All it did was prolong the agony — now 18 years and counting.
Jack: So precisely how much longer do you think the deflation will continue in the U.S.?
Martin: Nobody knows. But it's clear that this is not a short-term situation that will be resolved in the foreseeable future. It could take years to flush out the bad debts and restore confidence. The key is the debt liquidation. That's the main engine behind the deflation and a major element in vicious cycles that are just beginning to gain momentum. Consider the housing market, for example. The more debts are liquidated, the more prices fall ... and the more prices fall, the more people abandon their homes and mortgages, leading to more debt liquidation. This is what's happening all around the country right now — not only in housing, but also in every asset imaginable. These vicious cycles are like hurricanes striking every city and state in the country. Until they exhaust themselves, the deflation will continue.
Like you said at the outset, deflation is falling asset prices across the board. Not just falling home prices, but falling prices on land and commercial properties. Not just stocks and bonds, and commodities, but also collectibles — art, antiques, stamps and, soon, rare coins as well. There may be some exceptions. But overall, unless you have some very convincing evidence to the contrary, you must assume the value of your assets are going down and going down hard.
Jack: So what's a person to do?
Martin: If you don't need something, seriously consider selling it. Real estate. Stocks. Corporate bonds. Even collectibles if you consider them an investment.Jack: Even if it has already gone down a lot?
Martin: Don't look back at what the price was. Just look ahead to what the price will be after a massive deflation. You don't have to sell everything all at once at any price. Every time the government inspires a rally in the stock market, use that as a selling opportunity. Every time the government stimulates some activity in real estate or in the economy, grab that chance as well.
Jack: Suppose market conditions are so severe, there are no buyers. Then what?
Martin: Then, you can afford to wait for a temporary stabilization or recovery. Markets never go straight down. And even in some of the worst markets, there are ways to sell most assets.
Jack: What about antiques and art?
Martin: For the first time in many years, you're seeing a contraction in major auctions sales. For example, annual sales of contemporary art at Sotheby's and Christie's auctions in New York and London are down 17% in 2008. In the two years before that, they doubled in sales. So that's not a huge decline yet. But it's a sign.You won't get peak prices. However, if you act swiftly, you can still sell. If you wait, you'll get caught. Ditto for stamps and rare coins.
Jack: Gold is holding its value the best compared to the much larger percentages you cited earlier for other commodities. But I believe it's only a matter of time before gold succumbs to the deflation as well. What do you think?
Martin: This is hard for a lot of people to accept, but it's also hard to envision a situation in which gold defies gravity for much longer. It's still a good insurance policy against governments that could run amuck. But I suggest you reduce your holdings to a bare minimum. No matter what, the key is to pile up as much cash as you possibly can. Then put that cash into the safest place you possibly can — short-term Treasury securities. You can buy them from the Treasury Department directly, through their Treasury Direct Program. Or for even better liquidity, I recommend a Treasury-only money market fund. Our favorites are Capital Preservation Fund and the Weiss Treasury Only Money Market Fund. There are many more to choose from and they all provide the same safety.
Jack: Last week, there were some Treasury bills auctioned off at zero yield. Doesn't that discourage you?
Martin: Not in the slightest. As long as your cash is in a safe place, the deeper the deflation, the more your money is worth. My last word: Just make sure you keep it safe!
Jack: Martin, I'm going to assume that's my cue to jump in and take us beyond just safety and protection, so we can talk about turning this deflation into a profit opportunity.
Martin: Yes, please do.
Jack: There is just one thing that always goes up with deflation: The U.S. dollar! By DEFINITION, when the price of investments or goods and services goes down, the value of each dollar goes UP. That's the essence of deflation. And here's the key: When the value of the dollar goes up in the United States, it inevitably goes up abroad as well.
Martin: Please explain that connection more specifically.
Jack: Virtually everything that matters in the global economy — trade, commodities, GDP, debts — is measured in U.S. dollars. The dollar is the world's reserve currency. So just as we see domestically, when your dollar buys more, its value also rises internationally.
Martin: There was a lot of talk about other currencies replacing the dollar as a reserve currency. Jack: Talk, yes; action, no. It never happened. And now, it's going the other way: Your dollars now buy more than two gallons of gas for every one gallon they bought just a few months ago. The dollar now buys three times more oil and copper than just a few months ago. Not just 20% more or 50% more, but three times more! We're seeing the same thing happen against currencies. The dollar is in a massive, long-term uptrend against the euro, the British pound and virtually every currency in the world. Yes, we've witnessed a temporary dollar setback in recent days, but it does nothing to change the big trend.
Martin: It certainly does not change the deflation. But please give us specific reasons why the dollar is rising against currencies in particular.
Jack: There are three big reasons. The main one is that, as I said, the dollar is the global measure of virtually everything. So when there's global deflation, the dollar is the prime beneficiary. Look. We've had decade after decade of inflation and global expansion. During most of that period, the worldwide supply of dollars and dollar-based credit expanded dramatically. And those dollars became the key funding source of bubbles in nearly every major asset class — real estate, stocks, commodities, energy and metals. As the supply of dollars expanded, the dollar lost value. Now we have deflation and global contraction. So now everything is turning the other way. Despite the Fed's efforts to lower interest rates, credit — dollar credit — is drying up all over the world. The overall supply of dollars is contracting. So U.S. dollars are suddenly scarce and their value is going up.
Martin: Still many people in the U.S. don't see that. They think: "If the U.S. economy is in so much trouble, isn't that bad for the dollar?"
Jack: No, that's simply not how it works. A country's currency is never valued based on how well or how poorly that particular economy is doing in isolation. It's always measured against another country's currency. So it is always valued based on how a particular economy is doing relative to another economy. It's not the U.S. dollar vs. some other measure. It's the U.S. dollar versus the euro, the British pound, the Aussie dollar, etc. So the relevant question is never, "How well is the U.S. economy doing?" The question is, "How is the U.S. economy doing compared to the European economy, the U.K. or Australia?" In this environment, it's not a beauty contest. It's a contest of which economy is the least ugly ... which leads me to the second reason the dollar is rising: The U.S. is winning the least ugly contest hands down.
Martin: Please elaborate.Jack: Europe's banks have lent more than $2.7 trillion to the high-risk emerging markets, and those emerging markets are being crushed by deflation. Europe's banks have big exposure to Hungary, and Hungary is collapsing. They have big exposure to the Ukraine and to Russia, which are also collapsing.
Europe's economy is in much worse shape than ours. In Germany, export demand has vanished. So it's just now starting to accelerate downward. Worst of all, the Eurozone's governing bodies are a mess. You've got each member nation making its own monetary policy and each going off on a different course with its economic stimulus plans. For example, the European Central Bank wants to retain some semblance of moderation in its monetary policy. But the leaders in countries like Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland are scared. So they're going to whatever it takes to try to prop up demand, no matter what the central banks says.
Martin: It's adding political chaos to financial chaos.
Jack: Precisely. These are the reasons the euro has been falling and, despite a sharp rally, will likely continue to fall — probably down to parity with the dollar, or lower.
Martin: That's a huge drop — over 30% from these levels. What about the U.K.?
Jack: Worse. Their housing bust is more extreme than ours. Their reliance on revenues from a sinking financial center — London — is far worse than ours. Their consumers have more debt than almost any other developed country.
Martin: And the Australian dollar?
Jack: Solid as long as commodities were going up ... but a disaster with commodities going down! In just the last five months, the Australian dollar has lost 31% of its peak value. Other currencies tied to commodities are also getting killed: The New Zealand dollar is down 39% from its peak; the Brazilian real, 35%; the Canadian dollar, 23%.
Martin: And going forward?
Jack: Deflation means more declines in commodities. And the more commodities fall, the more these commodity currencies plunge. It's that simple.
Martin: You said you had three reasons for the dollar's surge.
Jack: The third reason is the flight to the center. Think of the world currency market as a solar system. The dollar is the sun; the other currencies, the planets. As the system expands, investors migrate from the core currency, the U.S. dollar, to the inner planets — currencies like the euro, the Swiss franc or the pound. And as the system expands even more, they migrate to the next tier of currencies, like the Australian dollar or the Canadian dollar ... and then, still further, to the system's periphery — outer planets like the Brazilian real, the Mexican peso or the South African rand. At each step of the way, they take more risk with less stable economies, use more leverage, go for bigger returns — all fueled by abundant dollar credit.
Martin: OK. What happens when the global economy contracts?
Jack: Precisely the reverse. As the global economy begins to come unglued, they rush back to the center, creating a massive flight back to the U.S. dollar. They have no love affair with the dollar. They just see the peripheral economies going down and they dump those currencies. These are the first risky investments they sell, almost invariably switching back to U.S. dollars. The U.S. economy, despite all its troubles, is still the dominant world economy. Militarily, it's the only remaining superpower. Financially, it's still the world's capital. So it's natural that when investors are running from risk, they rush back to the dollar, bidding up its value.Martin: Is this true across the board, regardless of the currency?
Jack: No. There's one notable exception: The Japanese yen. Japan is the world's second largest economy and also one of the world's largest sources of capital. So when the other currencies go down, a lot of that money goes back to Japan, boosting the yen. But the main point is this: The single most consistent consequence of global deflation is a rising dollar.
Martin: So in the midst of all these bear markets, if you're looking for a big bull market
...Jack: You've found it! It's the U.S. dollar. I think the U.S. dollar is in the early stages of a powerful bull market that could last for years. It's the single cleanest way to make windfall profits from the deflation.
Martin: A year or two ago, you were betting against the dollar, and you were right. Now you're betting on a rising dollar. That's a big change.
Jack: You're darn right it is! It goes hand-in-hand with the big sea change you've so clearly illustrated today.
Martin: Can you explain to our readers how to go about betting on a rising dollar?
Jack: There are several ways. You can place your bets in favor of the dollar, using instruments that are tied to the dollar index. So as the dollar index rises against other currencies, you profit directly. Or you can bet against foreign currencies. Remember, the flip side of a rising dollar is falling currencies. The more those currencies fall against the dollar, the more you make. I prefer betting against the currencies because that lets me choose the weakest of them all.
Martin: What instruments do you use?
Jack: I use a revolutionary investment vehicle called currency ETFs. They're simply exchange-traded funds, just like any other ETFs. The same ease of trading and flexibility, the same low commissions, the same availability through any stock broker. If you buy stocks or any other ETF, you can buy currency ETFs.
Martin: Before we get into this any further, can you give us full disclosure on the risks?
Jack: All investments have risk. If the currency goes the wrong way, you lose money. But the advantage of the currency market is that it's divorced from the stock market. The stock market could be crashing, and it would not interfere with your ability to make large steady profits in the currency market. The U.S. economy could be sinking into a depression, and it would still not interfere with your ability to make nice large steady profits in the currency market. No matter what happens in the global economy or the world's financial markets, there is always at least some major currency that's going up in value.
Martin: Please explain that.
Jack: Currencies are measured against each other. When one is going up, the other is going down, like a seesaw. Therefore, there's always at least one currency going up. There's always a bull market in currencies and, therefore, always a bull market in currency ETFs. I don't recommend currency ETFs for all of your money. But at a time when nearly all other investments are going down, it's a great place to get away from the disasters and find a whole separate world of investment opportunity.
Martin: A world that's far removed from those disasters.
Jack: Exactly. I also think that it's the ideal vehicle for average investors to profit from deflation and a rising dollar.
Martin: Specifically, which ETF do you use to profit from a rising dollar?
Jack: There's an ETF that's tied directly to a rising dollar index. The more the dollar rises, the more money you can make. And there's virtually no limit to how far it can go.
Martin: Before we end today, please name it for us. But of course, it's a two-way street. If the dollar falls, then this ETF would fall in value as well.
Jack: Of course. But there are also ETFs tied to specific falling currencies. When the dollar is rising, it means other currencies are falling. And with these ETFs, the more those currencies fall, the more money you can make. Plus, you can do it with two-for-one leverage.Take the euro, for example. If the euro falls 10%, you stand to make 20%. If the euro falls 20%, you can make 40%. And if you want to be more aggressive and buy them with 50% margin, you can double that leverage. In other words, every 10% decline in the currency gives you a 40% profit opportunity.
Martin: Do you recommend margin?
Jack: I don't think you need it. The currency market offers plenty of profit opportunity without margin.
Martin: Can you give us some specific examples without using margin?
Jack: Sure. Let's say you bet against the British pound last August. In just three months' time, you could have grabbed the equivalent of a 52% annual return on your money. The return on the euro would have been even better. If you could have bought the ETF that's designed to profit from a falling euro, you could have grabbed the equivalent of an 81% total annual return. On the Aussie, you could have made a 68% annual return.
Martin: With the way the stock market is performing and the way yields have fallen, I think most people would be happy with a lot less than that. Jack, if you can help folks make, say, 30% or even 20% per year, and you do so regularly, that would be a great service you provide.
Jack: Plus, we're not talking about speculating on some little-known stock or exoteric bond. When you buy currency ETFs, you're investing in the currency itself — CASH MONEY. You never own a single share of stock or any kind of bond.You're also not affected by financial failures. Since you never buy stocks or bonds in a bank or corporation that could default, currency ETFs help insulate you from the debt crisis. In fact, the debt crisis overseas, which is far more frightening than the debt crisis here, is driving investors into the U.S. dollar, which can actually help investors make more money in their dollar ETFs.
Martin: Since the ETFs are not investing in stocks or bonds, please explain what they are investing in.
Jack: In most cases, interest-bearing money markets. So in those ETFs, on top of the appreciation in the currency we're aiming for, you also earn interest. And with many currency ETFs, the interest yield is higher than what you can make in any U.S. money market.
Martin: Let's say you're wrong about the dollar and the dollar turns down. Then what?
Jack: In 2007, when the dollar was falling, we did very nicely. I have a service dedicated exclusively to currency ETFs, called World Currency Alert. And in it, I can recommend currency ETFs that are available now on every major currency. There's an ETF for the euro, the Japanese yen, the British pound, the Swiss franc, the Australian dollar, the Canadian dollar and more.
Sometimes we'll focus on just a couple of special opportunities; sometimes, when we have a broad movement in the currencies, we'll recommend you diversify among many different ones.
Martin: Does that require a larger investment?
Jack: No. Remember, these are just ETFs, just shares traded on the exchange. So you could buy just one share of each if you wanted to. In other words, there's virtually no investment minimum. With just $1,000, you could buy a whole range of different ETFs across several different currencies.
Martin: What kind of fees are we talking about to buy and sell the currency ETFs?
Jack: You pay a broker commission. But if you use a discount or online broker, your commission costs can be slashed to the bone.
Martin: How does this compare to trading standard ETFs, like those that focus on particular stock sectors?
Jack: I think it's a lot easier and better.
Martin: Why is that?
Jack: Instead of thousands of stocks and stock sectors, you only have to track six major currencies — the euro, British pound, Swiss franc, Japanese yen, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar. Instead of choppy and crazy stock market surges and plunges, currencies tend to give you much bigger, sweeping trends.
Martin: Because ...
Jack: Because once you get these massive macro global trends — like the deflation we talked about — turning them around is like turning a big tanker at sea. They can last for many years. It's like sailing with the Gulf Stream. You just follow the currency current as far as it will take you.
Martin: How would you characterize this current you're riding right now — the deflation pushing the dollar higher?
Jack: I've seen big currency trends before, but nothing quite like this one, nothing as powerful and large. Your numbers bring that home very convincingly, I think.
Martin: Tell us why you think investors should buy your service, and don't be bashful. I think it's safe to say that our readers want to know how to make real money from this deflation, and if you have a unique way to do this, its information they're going to want to pay close attention to. Jack: Actually, you don't need World Currency Alert to invest in currency ETFs. It's very easy to do, and like I said, they're readily available to anyone with a regular stock brokerage account. You buy and sell them just like a stock or any other ETF. You don't need any new accounts. They're extremely liquid. You just aim to buy them low and sell them high, like any other investment.Martin: What would you buy when?
Jack: Whenever you see a setback in the dollar, I would buy the PowerShares Dollar Bull ETF.
Martin: OK. So why should someone buy your service?
Jack: You don't need my service to buy them. You need World Currency Alert to make money in them, to take your profits, and to do it with some degree of consistency.
If your goal is to take no risk whatsoever and keep all your money 100% safe, then buying currency ETFs would be a mistake, because there IS always risk of loss. But if you're concerned about this deflation — or a future return of inflation — then NOT taking this opportunity is the mistake you'd be making, in my view. There's nothing, absolutely nothing standing in your way.
Martin: Except the cost of the service.Jack: No, I don't see that as an obstacle. The cost of World Currency Alert is just $295 per year. If you invested just a couple thousand in one of the trades I just mentioned, you could cover an entire year's cost very easily.
Martin: In terms of timing, when would be a good time for investors to start with your service?Jack: There's no particular time that's better than any other. Right now, we've had a setback in the dollar. So I'm looking to jump in with a new batch of recos, perhaps around the first week of the new year. So you could wait until then. The key timing issue is the price change we're going to put into place: Starting January 1, we're raising the price to $395. So don't wait until then. Because as long as you join before December 31, you save $100. Plus, there are even bigger savings if you join for two years. In fact, I think the two-year membership makes the most sense.
Martin: Because
...Jack: Because, like I said, it offers the biggest savings. And no matter what, if you're not happy, if it doesn't work for you or you just decide to change your mind, no problem — 100% money-back guarantee in the first 90 days; pro-rated refund at any time thereafter.
Martin: That's very fair. Please provide a web link for more info and to order your service.
Jack: It's http://images.moneyandmarkets.com/1195/88357.html
Or you can call 800-393-0189.
Martin: One way to look at this is like a home business to generate extra revenues.
Jack: I agree. All it takes is a couple of minutes each day, and for each minute of your time, you could be looking at a thousand or two in revenue per hour. Just remember, the price goes up January 1, 2009.
Martin: Thank you, Jack. And thank YOU, our readers, for joining us today. Let's talk again soon.Good luck and God bless!Martin


About Money and MarketsFor more information and archived issues, visit http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/Money and Markets (MaM) is published by Weiss Research, Inc. and written by Martin D. Weiss along with Tony Sagami, Nilus Mattive, Sean Brodrick, Larry Edelson, Michael Larson and Jack Crooks. To avoid conflicts of interest, Weiss Research and its staff do not hold positions in companies recommended in MaM, nor do we accept any compensation for such recommendations. The comments, graphs, forecasts, and indices published in MaM are based upon data whose accuracy is deemed reliable but not guaranteed. Performance returns cited are derived from our best estimates but must be considered hypothetical in as much as we do not track the actual prices investors pay or receive. Regular contributors and staff include Kristen Adams, Andrea Baumwald, John Burke, Amber Dakar, Michelle Johncke, Dinesh Kalera, Red Morgan, Maryellen Murphy, Jennifer Newman-Amos, Adam Shafer, Julie Trudeau and Leslie Underwood.Attention editors and publishers! Money and Markets issues can be republished. Republished issues MUST include attribution of the author(s) and the following short paragraph:This investment news is brought to you by Money and Markets. Money and Markets is a free daily investment newsletter from Martin D. Weiss and Weiss Research analysts offering the latest investing news and financial insights for the stock market, including tips and advice on investing in gold, energy and oil. Dr. Weiss is a leader in the fields of investing, interest rates, financial safety and economic forecasting. To view archives or subscribe, visit http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/.From time to time, Money and Markets may have information from select third-party advertisers known as "external sponsorships." We cannot guarantee the accuracy of these ads. In addition, these ads do not necessarily express the viewpoints of Money and Markets or its editors. For more information, see our terms and conditions.View our Privacy Policy.Would you like to unsubscribe from our mailing list?To make sure you don't miss our urgent updates, add Weiss Research to your address book. Just follow these simple steps.© 2008 by Weiss Research, Inc. All rights reserved.15430 Endeavour Drive, Jupiter, FL 33478