Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?

Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians. [MORE BELOW.]

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this bill.

“We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs—from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records—the list goes on,” Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her colleague, saying, “if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina.”

But the wide powers outlined in the Rockefeller-Snowe legislation has at least one Internet advocacy group worried. “The cybersecurity threat is real,” says Leslie Harris, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), “but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.” …

I can’t quote the entire article, but wish I could. So please READ “Should Obama Control the Internet?” (A new bill would give the President emergency authority to halt web traffic and access private data.).

And let us all contact our senators and representatives.

This bill strikes me as not only a threat to privacy and the free flow of information but also as exceedingly CLUMSY and CRUDE. Surely the specific targets of investigations can have their service interrupted through cooperating ISPs. But all of us? No. No way in hell. You and I are no threat to the U.S., and we count on our free flow of information to innocently communicate with each other.

There are already odd disruptions in communications amongst the members of our writers’ list, which I’ve noticed in the past when I was a list “mommy” for a group of people opposed to whaling, who the feds, rather ridiculously, thought might be a threat.

It’s notable that our new Secretary of Commerce, Gary Locke — who would be granted this sweeping authority — was governor of the state of Washington during the anti-whaling protests (for which I was only a list “mommy” and, because they bore me to tears and I figured that photographs would be taken that would lump us all together as “threats,” I didn’t attend any protests. Then-governor Locke bought the media hype that the anti-whaling protestors were such a dangerous threat that he called out the National Guard. The NATIONAL GUARD! That was a great surprise to the couple dozen aging hippies who held signs about 15 miles from the whaling operation. In other words, he’s an excitable sort and a square who didn’t get the distinction between the hype about anti-whaling protests and who the real protestors were. We don’t want him to have this massive power.

Remember when George Bush and Dick Cheney could rely on the many in the media to help them euphemize that dirty word, “torture?” It wasn’t torture, it was “enhanced interrogation.” That’s like calling the amputation of a leg, “enhanced skin removal below the waist.”

For those of you who were hoping for a new day. For those of you wanting change you could believe in. I have three words for you.

FORGET ABOUT IT!!

Today’s headline in the Washington Post, “GM Chief to Resign at White House’s Behest.” Great Marlon Brando’s ghost!! Talk about using language to cover up the truth. I guess it could have been worse. The White House could have said it made Wagoner an offer he couldn’t refuse. Did Luca Brasi pay Wagoner a visit? (If you have not seen the movie, The Godfather, you won’t have a clue what I’m talking about.)

Let’s be clear about what happened here. Barack Obama, somehow, is now in a position to fire the CEO of a publicly traded company. The phraseology employed to describe what happened to Wagoner reminds me of an observation from my friend Janet. Janet, who is from the midwest, noted that folks on the east coast frequently will complain by stating, “I have an issue.” Janet told me:

They may be issues on the east coast but in the midwest they are fucking problems.

The firing of Rick Wagoner was not made for any rational economic reason. This is pure politics, designed in part to portray Barack as a tough guy who is taking charge on the eve of his international debut at the G20 summit. Not a single person on the Obama economic team has ever run a business or met a payroll. Barack and his team of bozos could not find a Secretary of Treasury who felt it important to pay taxes and wanted to appoint Tom Daschle to run Health and Human Services even though he was a lobbyist taking freebies on the side. And these are the people who want us to believe that they know how to run a car company?

Well Barack, it is your baby now. You are in charge of GM and its fate. If it survives and prospers you will be doing the big booty shake as you celebrate your second inauguration. But if GM falters, no amount of obfuscation and murky language will be able to mask the stink of this turd.

I thank Susan and Andy for tipping me off to remarks made earlier today in which Sheila Bair Says “Too Big to Fail” Strategy for Financial Institutions Must End. The administration and other political pundits are trying to make the case that the Federal Reserve should serve as the systemic risk regulator. In my opinion, Sheila Bair should occupy that role. There is a major political battle developing over this turf. Make no mistake that how this battle plays out will have deep and longstanding implications for our financial system as a whole and for individual consumers.

My vote goes to Ms. Bair and the FDIC, “for doing it correctly” to this point. The U.S. Systemic Risk Watchdog Not Panacea highlights the developing battle between the FDIC and the Fed. Both of these entities have a lot on their plate already, but I believe the FDIC is better positioned to handle this role. Bair and team are laser focused on banking institutions, while the Fed is more broadly focused on the economy, money supply, and the markets.

In recent discussions with a number of colleagues, the topic of the dramatically changing landscape in the world of banking keeps coming up. For many individuals, banks and banking operations can generate a fair amount of anxiety. In the process of praising Ms. Bair, I would like to use that as an opportunity to personalize the world of banking highlighted at the FDIC website.

This site addresses Deposit Insurance, Consumer Protection, Industry Analysis, Asset Sales, Regulations and Examinations, and News and Events. The world of banking does not need to be overwhelming. The opportunities to properly manage your finances, find solid investment opportunities, and navigate the economic landscape are a mere point and click away. Anything you do not understand, bring it right back to Sense on Cents!!

LD

A precursor to the turmoil roiling our economy and markets today occurred on a smaller, but certainly very dramatic, scale in 1998. The meltdown of the hedge fund Long Term Capital Management brought the market to its knees at the time. LTCM was effectively taken over by a consortium of Wall Street banks at the behest of New York Federal Reserve Chairman, William McDonough. The firms injected approximately $3 billion dollars in order to stabilize LTCM and then unwound it in an orderly fashion.

The lessons learned in the LTCM crisis were obviously not learned well enough because we are experiencing them again a multiple hundred fold. The centerpiece of our current fiasco is AIG (known at Sense on Cents as “Ain’t It Great”).

The dramatic story of Long Term Capital Management is captured in a book I strongly recommend for anybody interested in the history of the financial markets. When Genius Failed, by Roger Lowenstein, is a great read and truly captures the intrigue, egos, and tension of that period. As the current turmoil unwinds I look forward to the books published on this period, as well.

While books can be entertaining, they are not the vehicle for learning real lessons. Personal experience is always the best teacher.

I dealt personally with the partners of LTCM during the development of their firm, throughout its 4 year duration, and its downfall. LTCM operated in a totally quantitative style where the models embedded in black boxes dictated transactions. AIG did the same.

LTCM thought they had a diversified book of exposures across foreign and domestic sectors of both the credit and equity markets. AIG did the same, although their greatest exposure centered on the sub-prime mortgage space.

LTCM viewed themselves as both bigger and smarter than the market itself. AIG did the same.

LTCM totally mispriced liquidity risk, that is the risk that another human being needed to provide liquidity for the unwinding of a trade. AIG did the same.

LTCM was not officially bailed out. Although the principals and investors in that fund were largely wiped out, the firm did not outright fail as the consortium of banks injected capital. Did the moral hazard of that experience play into the AIG debacle? This point will be debated in the months and years ahead.

One angle of the LTCM meltdown that has received very little public attention over the years was the manner in which Wall Street banks managed their own books and capital during that period. In short, the senior executives of the consortium of banks involved in saving the system during the LTCM meltdown became totally aware of LTCM’s positions. That confidential information was tremendously valuable because those positions obviously needed to be unwound. In layman’s terms, if I know you are in a position of having to sell something, I can drive the market lower in your face so you are forced to sell at an ever lower price. It is widely speculated that Goldman Sachs effectively front ran the unwinding of LTCM’s positions and made hundreds of millions of dollars in the process.

Fast forward to today’s situation with AIG. The Wall Street banks certainly know what AIG’s positions are along with the fact that the government is trying to unwind these positions. Do you think Wall Street traders are sitting idly by as AIG tries to unwind this mess? Why has AIG needed an ever increasing amount of government money? Very simply, the markets that AIG has exposure to are continuing to weaken as they try to exit positions. Why are they weakening? It would be naive to think that other Wall Street traders are not once again front running AIG much as Goldman Sachs’ traders supposedly front ran LTCM in 1998.

How can the government prevent any front running on behalf of Wall Street banks? Regulators should be scouring the trading records of every AIG counterparty on a regular basis. Are the regulators doing this? The government and regulators are certainly stretched very thin. Are Wall Street traders taking advantage of the situation? It would be naive to think they are not.

Trust but verify!! Actually, why should we trust a crowd that has provided no basis for trust to this point? Let’s just verify!!

LD

Part 1
In this clip, Geithner wears both the political and policy hats. While promoting the Obama agenda initially (housing, education, healthcare, energy), he then turns toward the specifics of unlocking the consumer credit securitization markets via the TALF (Term Asset Backed Securities Loan Facility). This facility attempts to restart the securitization market and model which I wrote was broken back on November 12th (The Wall Street Model Is Broken…and Won’t Soon be Fixed). That market provides approximately 40% of the financing to a wide array of consumer finance markets. Geithner attempts to portray a measure of confidence and aggressiveness. The market has currently responded with a vote of no confidence.

Part 2
Geithner addresses further specifics about the TALF and the public/private partnership that would be connected to the effort. The specifics of this public/private partnership are not addressed but, in essence, the government would provide financing (loans) for private entities to purchase asset-backed securities currently clogging bank balance sheets. Geithner does not provide specifics on the terms of the loans and MORE IMPORTANTLY does not address the fact that the government will likely share in the losses on these securities going forward. I believe many private investors are salivating at the potential for this program. Our Economic All Star John Mauldin commented that this partnership is the equivalent of government money coming in the front door and going to hedge funds out the back door. Mauldin proposes a suspension of the “mark to market” accounting rule that forces banks to mark these securities to depressed levels in the presence of no buyers.

Geithner defends his aborted initial delivery on his grand plan as “mismanaged expectations.” He also inaccurately describes mortgage rates as being close to 5%. The “mortgage mirage,” in which many people can not get a mortgage, has 30 year conventional mortgage rates closer to 5.5% and Jumbo rates in the 7% range, but virtually inaccessible.

Part 3
Geithner is forceful in this clip in stating that the government will stand behind the 20 largest banking institutions. These banks represent approximately 70% of the banking industry and – without using the phrase – Geithner is saying they’re “too big to fail.” He defends the capital injected as ultimately being in the best interests of the economy and taxpayers. He rails on the mismanagement and gross compensation practices at many of these institutions. He appreciates the anger and outrage of responsible people who are sufferring from the damage caused by those who have been irresponsible. All good.

When addressing the need for global regulatory changes as well as domestic regulatory changes, I suggest Secretary Geithner listen to former Australian Prime Minister and Treasurer Paul Keating who undressed him this past weekend. Keating opines that the IMF and World Bank will see a massive shift in power to the surplus economies of the East from the debtor economies of the West. Here at home, when Geithner talks about focused accountability, let’s see if he and the Obama administration effect the necessary changes in the corrosive influence of lobbyists as well as addressing the incompetence displayed at the SEC and FINRA.

Part 4
Geithner attempts to make the case that investors, both foreign and domestic, will continue to invest in our country and our U.S. government debt if they have confidence. The administration has the obligation to maintain that confidence. The first step in maintaining the confidence is displayed in the budget proposed by President Obama. Geithner puts his political hat back on in promoting the Obama agenda as being economically sound, laced with fiscal discipline, and promoting their moral obligation.

Investors are less sure about Geithner’s feelings and have voiced their indecision by exiting the markets since this budget was proposed.

Geithner further addresses the necessity for individuals, corporations, and governments to live within their means. Investors have roundly responded that they believe this administration and Congress are doing anything but living within their means given the undisciplined spending in the Stimulus plan, the budget, and the Omnibus Bill.

Geithner uses the lessons of the ’90s as justification for raising taxes going forward. He prefaces his remarks that taxes will only be raised “when the economy recovers.” Charlie Rose appropriately challeneges him on the overly optimistic economic assumptions utilized in the budget. I would ask why the base case GDP in the Bank Stress Test of 2% growth in 2010 is not the same level of GDP used in Obama’s budget. The budget assumes 3.2% !!

Part 5
In this clip, Geithner is largely wearing his political hat. He defends the Administration’s vetting process as he staffs Treasury. He further pushes the Obama agenda. In regards to criticism he has experienced, he responds that it is purely part of the job.

On the auto front, he dodges the question of bankruptcy.

Charlie Rose then questions him on what he has learned so far in his role as Treasury Secretary. Geithner responds that many may not know that he spent a large part of his career at Treasury serving under Robert Rubin and Larry Summers. He holds them in very high regard and seems to promote that respect for them is universal. He does not address that Rubin was at the core of the lack of regulatory oversight that we have had for the last decade, as well as being the prime architect of the massive systemic risk that Citibank has developed.

When asked if he could see the problems developing that now envelop our economy, Geithner ducks in stating that most people missed it.

Part 6
Geithner remarks that both capitalism and our financial system have already changed and will continue to change as the necessary regulatory systems are put in place.

Geithner further adds that he is confident America will respond to this crisis because it is not a question of ability but a question of will. He believes this Administration possesses the will to make every necessary move to restore our economy.

In my personal opinion, it is also most definitely about ability as well. Do we have the measure of integrity and quality in our elected officials? Chuck Hagel, Leon Panetta and others have railed on the corrupt system of lobbying, campaign contributions, and persistent fundraising that has polluted our country and the process of government. While the Obama Administration has spoken about addressing parts of these issues, their actions and policy proposals to date indicate otherwise.

I found the Geithner interview to be interesting, while not exactly enlightening.

He is both politician and policy maven. To this point, the markets have graded him as decidedly mediocre. Although, to be fair, Washington as a whole is graded no better.

LD

Video provided by CheneyWatch.org for NoQuarterUsa.net YouTube channel

Along with the aformentioned, I have also previously remarked on my high regard for John Mauldin, one of our Economic All-Stars. John himself possesses an insightful global perspective and has a circle of friends and confidantes that are simply off the charts.

In John’s weekly Outside the Box, he shares with us the perceptions of Michael E. Lewitt. Mr. Lewitt writes at length on topics we have covered here previously, but his level of detail and thoughtful analysis are well worth the read.

Topics covered include:
1. economic policies proposed by Obama administration are not promoting long term growth.

2. market outlook . . . sell rallies as earnings and prices are projected lower by 10-25%.

3. R (ecession) vs D (epression) . . . whatever you want to call it, our economy is going to have low growth at best when growth does return . . . time, time, time . . .

4. changing dynamics in the world of investing mandate that people get further up the learning curve . . . . Come to Sense on Cents!!!

5. bank nationalization, in perception or actuality, is a drag on the economy as a whole and specifically for well managed banking institutions

6. holds particular scorn for the “bank robbery” that occurred at Merrill Lynch during the bonus payouts in late 2008.

7. GM is bankrupt in all but name, so now it is time to deal with the truth and go through the bankruptcy process..

8. Obama’s budget utilizes wildly optimistic economic projections and is set up to fail. Government waste MUST be eliminated.

9. the coming meltdown in eastern Europe “will have major negative consequences for world financial markets.”

As I read Lewitt’s piece, Reality Bites, I kept nodding my head and whispering to myself, ‘that’s right,” “yep, I agree,” and “why doesn’t the media cover this?”

This piece may take two sittings to read, but as you look to navigate your own economic landscape it is a must read. Please share it with friends and colleagues as well.

LD

The Unemployment Rate jumped from 7.6% to 8.1%. The rate was expected to move to 7.9%. The 8.1% rate is a 25 year high.

Non-farm Payrolls lost 651k jobs against an expectation of a loss of 650k jobs. In line with expectations, right? Well, one needs to look at the revisions to the prior two months to get the full picture. Non-farm payroll revisions from the prior two months show a further loss of 161k jobs over and above initial reports. That’s ugly!! Total jobs lost since December 2007, when the recession officially began, are 4.4 million!! More than half of those jobs have been lost in the last 4 months.

Average hourly earnings only rose .2. This number is not exactly robust and will further pressure consumers who are already cash constrained.

Average workweek remained steady at 33.3 hours. With fewer workers, but no increase in the workweek, this indicates that expected GDP will remain sluggish.

Jobs were lost across virtually every sector of the economy with the exception of healthcare. Manufacturing and construction were particularly decimated with losses of over 100k.

While the actual unemployment rate is 8.1%, that figure does not fully represent the actual health of employment in our country. Why? Very simply there are thousands of workers who have given up looking for work. They do not figure into the rate. Additionally, there are thousands who are underemployed, meaning they are working part time but would like to work fulltime.

Analysts do not see any news in this report indicating an improving economy.

Market reactions are generally muted. Stocks are effectively unchanged, and bonds are down a touch. Remember, next week the U.S. government is auctioning another $67 billion in a variety of notes to finance our growing deficit. Look for rates to rise in front of that supply.

I have done some market analysis over the last few days and see no reasons to get constructive on buying the market at this juncture. The forces at work in the economy continue to indicate challenging times on the horizon. The programs from Washington are receiving mixed reactions and muted benefits at best.

We may still get days like this past Wednesday which are nothing more than bear market rallies. The bearish trend remains in place and the path of least resistance remains LOWER.

LD

**Cross-posted from my blog, Sense On Cents. Come by and visit!

Sheila Bair is proactively managing expectations for all concerned, those being politicians, regulators, bankers, and consumers. In fact, if she did not highlight the current state of the FDIC reserve fund and expectations for future declines, she would not be fulfilling her obligations.

The FDIC is funded by making assessments on all the banks throughout the country. With those assessments assuredly headed much higher, bank earnings will be dramatically impacted this year. In fact, analysts believe that many banks’ earnings will decline by anywhere from 50% to 100%!! The smaller community banks are enraged by the prospects of higher assessments given that many if not most of these banks managed their businesses with appropriate risk controls.

Read the rest ->

While taxpayers do not directly fund the FDIC, the fees incurred by member banks will be passed along to consumers in the form of increased charges on every transaction. If you feel like you are getting “nickeled and dimed” to death it is due to these increased FDIC assessments.

In light of this situation, what is one to do? First and foremost, make sure you do not have any deposits over the FDIC insured deposit limit of $250k at any one institution. The FDIC website has a wealth of information including an online estimator to assist you in calculating your FDIC insurance coverage. Additionally, proactively manage your finances so you can minimize your banking needs. I continue to encourage people to shop around for your banking needs, as well as for insurance and all other financial needs. Credit unions remain a great alternative to many traditional banks.

LD

While I have written twice over the last week about eastern Europe being the weakest link in the world of global finance, Mauldin and his colleague Niels Jensen of Absolute Return Partners provided insights and analysis that is numbing.

Why is George Soros short the euro? Let me provide a synopsis of Mauldin’s and Jensen’s “Europe On the Ropes.” This piece is somewhat lengthy, but a MUST READ!! A link is provided at the end of my review.

Jensen initially provides a backdrop of the collective guilt across all market participants in this global economic meltdown. The U.K. government is targeted by Jensen for their total lack of fiscal discipline in the process. He further adds that the outlandish banking compensation was a direct correlation of the leverage employed. Jensen focuses on the preponderance of supposed AAA rated CLOs (Collateralized Loan Obligations) backed by corporate loans and credit cards. The leverage employed by the European banks dwarfed the leverage employed by U.S. banks.

To this point Jensen’s analysis is enlightening but not earth shattering. He then enters into the rate of expected defaults on the European banks’ balance sheets, the exposures to eastern Europe, and the specifics of mortgage borrowing by eastern European citizens from European banks. I started to get a little queasy.

Jensen’s comparisons of the details in this crisis relative to the Asian crisis experienced in the late 90’s is scary. His focus specifically on Austria and the level of their debt exposure is also daunting. My queasiness increased.

Please read the Mauldin/Jensen report in its entirety so you can gain a further appreciation of the pressure in that part of the world and the implications for these economies, countries, and their political stability. Last Sunday evening on NQR’s Dollars & Sense, I spoke at length about the global government funding needs. On that very topic, Jensen writes:

Public debt to rise and rise

. . . the banking sector cannot, in the current environment at least, raise sufficient capital to stay afloat, so more, possibly a lot more, tax payers’ money will have to be put forward. This can only mean one thing. Public debt will rise and rise. The official estimate for the UK for next year is already approaching 10% of GDP, an estimate which will almost certainly rise further. We probably have to get used to running 10-15% deficits for a few years, a fact which seriously undermines the notion of government bonds being next to risk-free.

BCA Research has calculated the effect on public debt in a number of countries, as a result of further bank losses being underwritten by tax payers. Obviously, those countries with the largest banking industries (as a % of GDP) will be hit the hardest.

Mauldin and Jensen are clearly on the cutting edge of the weakest link in the global economy today. In light of this color, there is no surprise why George Soros is short the Euro.

I would never raise undue anxiety, but this situation is very fluid and needs to be watched daily. I will be doing that as I try to help you navigate the economic landscape!!

LD

The dynamic at work in the weekend’s emergency meeting held in Brussels is a play on beggar-thy-neighbor policies implemented during times of economic stress.

There are actually a number of factors influencing the European Union’s refusal to provide bailout money to these eastern European nations. Included in these factors are the following:

1. lack of coordination even within the eastern European countries themselves. Certain countries, such as Poland, are in better shape than others. Beggar-thy-neighbor within a beggar-thy-neighbor framework!!

2. a desire by some of these eastern European nations to accelerate their formal acceptance into the European Union fell on deaf ears. The acceptance into the EU would have helped them gain the stability of the common currency, the Euro.

3. problems within the EU itself as certain countries, such as Ireland and Portugal, are already massively stressed with their own financial problems.

Where do these eastern European countries go now to get help? They will likely solicit the IMF, International Monetary Fund initially. The IMF is already hard strapped for funding.

While the EU Rejects a Rescue of Faltering Eastern Europe, my concern is that ultimately this stress will cause the eastern European nations to become more isolated from their western European neighbors. In the process of aligning themselves more with their Asian neighbors to the east, we may see heightened political tensions and instability as well. It may be premature to make the assumption that this situation ultimately leads to increased politcal tensions in this part of the world, but that assumption is not a stretch by any means.

Clearly in the German mindset is the desire to maintain strict support for its currency, the Euro. I can never get away from the fact that embedded deep in the German culture is the experience of hyperinflation after the Weimar Republic. That experience was truly the precursor to the German fascist state, which led to WWII.

It is very conceivable that we will see other political changes develop during this time of turmoil. I will be monitoring in an attempt to help us all navigate the economic landscape.

Well, if misery loves company, it has a solid partner in the person of Warren Buffett because 2008 was Berkshire Hathaway’s worst year ever. In reviewing Buffett’s letter, allow me to offer some highlights. For those who have an even passing interest in the markets and investing, reading this letter is akin to attending an opera by Pavarotti.

I beg your indulgence as I attempt to be the opening act and provide an overview of the “Oracle of Omaha’s” thoughts on the markets and economy:

1. Berkshire’s 4th quarter 2008 generated net income of $117 million, a mere 96% decline vs 2007!!

2. The results suffered primarily due to significant exposure to insurance companies, Coca-Cola, and American Express.

3. The stock, down 32% for all of 2008, marginally outperformed the major indices. The stock is down 19% for 2009, in line with the market.

4. In regard to the economy, Buffett forecasts it will be in a shambles throughout 2009 — and for that matter probably well beyond.

5. “The U.S. Treasury bubble of late 2008 may be regarded as almost equally extraordinary” to the internet bubble of the 1990’s and the housing bubble of the 2000’s.”

6. He is humble enough to highlight some investment mistakes made in Conoco Phillips and Irish banks.

7. Buffett repeats his railing on derivatives as too complex so that auditors can’t audit and regulators can’t regulate. He specifically calls out the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight for its failure to properly regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

I do know at one point that Berkshire held a major stake in at least one, if not both, of these agencies as he highlighted them as the closest thing to a monopoly in American business. I am gathering he liquidated those holdings or otherwise the press would have made more of it.

8. Buffett also points out the impending problems in municipal finance with major concerns on the funding of pension obligations by municipalities. In speaking with a professional in this space, he highlighted the exact same point. Municipalities will have to pay higher rates to borrow money and municipal insurers will be hit with increased charges.

Read all of what the oracle has to say along with a whole host of other info as Berkshire Hathaway Reports Worst Year Ever.

LD

Let’s review my specific projections from the January 2009 Recap:

For those who track the markets, there is a 75-80% correlation in the annual moves in equity markets with the performance in January. Without parsing words, this performance in January portends a very challenging year for our equity markets. All eyes and ears remain focused on Washington for a comprehensive financial rescue package (Bank Transition, insurance for other assets, aid to stem foreclosures, et al). Trade the range for now with a very wide band. Buy the S&P as it approaches 750 and sell it as it moves above 900. Otherwise….be patient!!

In the bond space, I did believe and continue to believe that despite the Fed and Treasury promoting the concept of quantitative easing (using the Fed’s balance sheet to buy Treasury, agency, and mortgage related assets), these rates will work their way higher simply due to the MASSIVE financing needs of our government and global governments.

The corporate bond space, led by high yield bonds, had very solid returns this month. As we mentioned, we thought these sectors had already priced in the economic turmoil to a much greater extent than the stock markets. High yield bonds were up almost 10% on the month. I would not add to that sector after that performance.

The dollar inched lower versus the Japanese yen. I believe the dollar will continue to weaken versus the yen, as well as the Canadian dollar. The U.S. dollar dramatically outperformed the Euro and the British pound. The economic situation in Europe is just as bad, if not worse, than in U.S. In fact, a number of European countries are being seriosuly challenged to raise funds. Sovereign credit risks (the risk that a government defaults) have risen considerably.

In the world of commodities, gold outperformed due to the global government credit risk, the threat of longer term inflation, and weakness in currencies. Oil remains very volatile but ended the month down 2.5%. Metals remain weak with anemic demand.

Add it all up and what is one to do? In my estimation, an investor is being paid to WAIT before making any major capital commitments. For those who are significantly underweighted stocks, a dollar cost averaging (add a fixed dollar amount on a regular basis versus one lump sum at one point in time) approach is always recommended. I am not going out on a limb to say that we will retest the lows (down another 7-9%) seen on November 20th.

Well, we have retested those November 20th lows and on the last two days of the month took them out by 2-3%. We are now down anywhere from 12-19% across the board for most stock indices on a year to date basis.

In a normal market environment, if stocks gave ground by 2-4%, one would expect government bonds to rally in a “flight to quality” move. The fact that equities are down 11% for the month and government rates have moved HIGHER is a clear indication that the overwhelming supply of government bonds to finance our deficit will continue to be a major issue going forward. The market absorbed well more than $150 billion in government supply (bills to 30 year bonds) this month. In the face of that, it is no surprise that rates moved higher. The question for investors is where does one go.

The enormous government supply along with the weakness in stocks did put a dent in the credit sensitive sectors of the bond market this month. The “crowding out” effect (government financing needs crowd out the availability of capital to flow to private enterprise) will continue to be a major problem.

In very volatile trading, the U.S. dollar did improve primarily versus the Japanese yen while only marginally versus the Euro (although it is significantly stronger vs the Euro on a year to date basis). As I mentioned to a reader, the yen seems to have weakned as many hedge funds have finished unwinding trades in which they had borrowed the yen. I missed this call and thus I was clearly wrong that the dollar would still weaken vs the yen.

Gold is up solidly on the year but actually had gotten higher than $1,000/oz during the month. I do not invest in gold simply due to a highly speculative contingent that plays in this commodity. I think many funds and managers have purchased this commodity as a safe haven move but are willing to sell those positions out for short term profits.

The BIG question is where do we go from here. Should I buy stocks here? Should I sell? Should I hold? Obviously, those are questions that can only be answered based on one’s personal situation. All I can offer is my assessment of the markets, the economy, Washington, Wall Street and hope it helps you navigate your own financial and economic landscape.

While the markets have retraced back to those November 20th lows and even moved lower by 2-3%, I still can not make a case for buying the market. Why? Very simply because overall market valuations do NOT clearly and distinctly display themselves as cheap. You may ask how is it that markets that are now down 50+% are not cheap. Remember that stock prices are a measure of forward earnings and the multiple paid for those earnings. A fair multiple is typically between 12-18% but in bear markets that multiple can get decidedly cheaper than 12. Let’s take a multiple of 15 times. At yesterday’s close of 735, that equates to an earnings projection on the S&P 500 of $49/share. That is overly optimistic and hopeful and thus the risk remains too high relative to the reward.

I always traded and invested based on the premise that “hope is a lousy hedge” meaning that one needs to fully review the risks prior to investing and not “close your eyes, buy in because it is down a lot, and HOPE it works.” I do think we are approaching a stage where the market may still move lower but then start more of a sideways price action. Why? Very simply because the volumes are declining on a lot of exchanges which indicate the selling pressure is abating. That said, I think investors are in NO rush to buy.

I actually have somewhat greater concerns about bonds than stocks. Why? I think a lot of investors have rushed into the bond market, that supply of bonds will increase not only in the government space but also the municipal space as towns, cities and states deal with their budgetary problems. Corporate bonds were very cheap relative to stocks coming into the year but have dramatically outperformed in the first two months. Given that a lot of investors in the corporate bond space are newer investors (looking for a place to park money), I think bonds across all sectors may start to weaken from here.

The U.S. dollar is benefitting from a flight to quality move given the major political and social issues elsewhere in the world. Additionally, as the U.S. government has shown it will not allow major banks to fail (although the banks’ shareholders can and will be diluted), a lot of money has flowed into the dollar. I think the Canadian dollar and Australian currency are fundamentally stronger than the U.S. dollar at this point.

In regard to Washington and its impact on the economy and markets, it strikes me that the Obama administration is hellbent on implementing as much of its social program and liberal agenda as quickly as possible. The markets are sending a very clear signal that his agenda is not pro-growth, investor friendly, or fiscally sound. He’s the President and the electorate sent the Republicans home, so we need to let our democratic process work. That said, the markets do not and will not stand idly by “HOPING” things work out.

I do firmly believe we will work our way through these economic challenges, but it will be a longer and harder road than most market analysts and political pundits would promote. Maintaining hope is a critically important part of our country and our moral fiber. I am ALWAYS hopeful, but I am not blindly hopeful. That would be called willful neglect.

Check out the piece, Buy and Hope Investing, written by John Mauldin, one of our Economic All-Stars (see left sidebar at Sense on Cents).

One thing I truly hope is that you find Sense on Cents helps you to navigate the economic landscape and that you will share the site with your friends.

LD

For clarification purposes and at the request of a number of readers, allow me to address this deduction. As proposed in President Obama’s budget, for those households currently paying taxes in the 33% and 35% brackets, the mortgage deduction would now be at a 28% rate. The proposal would not take effect until 2011.

This Mortgage Deduction Looks Less Sacred. Its effect can and is hotly debated by economists and housing analysts. In my opinion, though, there are a few points not debatable. This initiative is another method of achieving wealth redistribution. It will make housing more expensive at the margin. It will put pressure on housing in general and in upper income areas specifically. Given that there are no initiatives proposed to support those needing Jumbo mortgages, this tax change will only further negatively impact this sector of the market.

Lastly, is this Obama’s “crossing the Rubicon?” Don’t think for a second that this initiative just developed. How and why did we NEVER hear about this during the campaign? Did he know how negatively it would be received?

In summary, having “crossed the Rubicon,” how far does he penetrate into the territory?

We’ll be watching, but knowing how wildly optimistic his growth projections are in his proposed budget, Obama will need more $$$. The mortgage interest deduction just became fair game.

I need to call my accountant.

LD

***UPDATE: I was not aware at the time of my writing but it is reported that the Obama administration is projecting the economy will grow at a 3.2% GDP in 2010. That assumption is wildly optimistic. No respected economist would project that figure. Consensus has it in the 1.5-2% range. What does this mean? Well, lower growth means lower revenues, means higher deficits, means greater funding needs, means more borrowing, means higher government interest rates, means more “crowding out”, means slower growth for the economy going forward!!

There was little doubt about President Obama’s social agenda and economic platform during his campaign. While markets will somewhat discount campaign rhetoric, they do not discount economic reality. The markets are sending a strong signal that Obama’s economic proposals and proposed budget are anything but pro-growth. Obama Delivers $3.6 Trillion Budget Blueprint runs the risk of raising taxes at a time of economic distress. Raising taxes was a prime factor that increased the economic malaise in the 1930s. Obama is willing to take that risk as he sticks to his campaign plan and is pressured by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.

We know that housing lies at the core of our economic crisis. Decreasing a mortgage interest deduction as proposed to fund his health care proposal will only serve to put further pressure on a large part of our nation’s housing market. I thought we were trying to stabilize housing.

Proposing a decrease in the deduction for charitable giving by the top 2% is not going to help increase — let alone hold — the level of giving when it is most badly needed. (Joe Biden needn’t worry about this given he has averaged $350 per year in charitable giving over the last ten years!! That’s right. Those stats are in his publicly filed tax returns). I thought we were trying to promote charitable giving.

Given that many small businesses file under the individual tax system as limited liability companies or Subchapter S corporations, Obama’s proposed tax increases will not serve to help employment. I thought we were trying to promote job growth.

Well, I can’t say that I’m surprised by Obama aggressively putting forth his agenda, but this is the redistribution of wealth that was hotly debated during the campaign.

I strongly believe the government should not focus on tax rates but rather tax revenues. What rates generate the most revenues and then spend it accordingly.

Additionally, if one thinks his tax increases are stopping at the top 2% or only those at 250k and above, let me share with you that these changes will effect those with taxable earnings of 208k. Well, 208k vs 250k. I mean it’s close. If you think he is stopping at that, guess again. The 2% Illusion is not reality!!

Obama is President so he writes the budget, but for every action there is a reaction and the markets are not reacting well.

Ceteris are NEVER paribus!

LD

I know of no team that has ever established a winning discipline by “throwing Hail Mary’s.” The same can be said of investing. In the midst of these challenging markets, do not lose sight of your long range goals and the disciplines necessary to achieve them. Leave the “Hail Mary’s” for the gridiron entertainment.

The Wall Street Journal provides us with an excellent piece on this topic:

Desperate investors do desperate things.

A few months ago, most people were too terrified to do much more than wring their hands while sitting on them. But now, as the stock market takes another bullet every day and the yields on cash dwindle away, some investors seem to be flinging caution to the winds.

You can read the rest of the article at your leisure. Enjoy your weekend. – LD -

As Stock Losses Loom, Don’t Throw a ‘Hail Mary’
by Jason Zweig
illustration by Heath Hinegardner
The Wall Street Journal; February 20, 2009