Gold is Still Money

May 29, 2009

By Robert Prechter, CMT

The following article is excerpted from a brand-new eBook on gold and silver published by Robert Prechter, founder and CEO of the technical analysis and research firm Elliott Wave International. For the rest of this fascinating 40-page eBook, download it for free here.

Have you ever traveled abroad and taken a look at the local currency and wondered how the citizens of that country could take seriously what looks like “Monopoly money?” I’ve got news for you: You’re using the same stuff. Monopoly money is the money over which some government has a monopoly. It is the currency of the realm only because the state makes it illegal to use any other type.

Promissory notes issued by a state and declared the only legal tender are always doomed to depreciate to worthlessness because of the natural incentives and forces associated with governments. A state cannot resist a method of confiscating assets, particularly one that is hidden from the view of most voters and subjects. By extension, it is unreasonable to advocate a standard for such notes, which is simply a state’s promise that its currency will always be redeemable in a specific amount of something valuable, such as gold. A gold standard of this type is only as good as the political promises behind it, reducing its value to no more than that of paper. It could be argued, in fact, that a state-sponsored gold standard is far more dangerous than none at all, as it imbues citizens with a false sense of security. Their long range plans are thus built upon an unreliable promise that the monetary measuring unit will remain stable. Later, when the government’s “IOU-something specific” becomes, as Colonel E.C. Harwood put it, “IOU nothing in particular,” reliability disappears and the arbitrary reigns. Although the populace tends to retain its confidence in the currency for awhile thereafter, the ultimate result is chaos.

The only sound monetary system is a voluntary one. The free market always chooses the best possible form, or forms, of money. To date, the market’s choice throughout the centuries, wherever a free market for money has existed, has been and remains precious metal and currency redeemable in precious metal. This preference will undoubtedly remain until a better form of money is discovered and chosen. Until then, prices for goods and services should be denominated not in state fictions such as dollars or yen or francs, but in specific weights of today’s preferred monetary metal, i.e., in grams of gold. Anyone might issue promissory notes as currency, but the acceptance of such paper certificates would then be an individual decision, and risks of loss through imprudence or dishonesty would be borne by only a few individuals by their own conscious choice after considering the risks. Critical to the understanding of the wisdom of such a system is the knowledge that private issuers of paper against gold have every long run incentive to provide a sound product, just as do producers of any product. As a result, risks would be minimal, as the market would provide its own policing. Thievery and imprudence will not disappear among men, but at least such tendencies in a free market for money would not have the potential to be institutionalized, as they are when a state controls the currency. From a macroeconomic viewpoint, occasional losses resulting from dishonesty or imprudence would be extremely limited in scope, as opposed to the nationwide disasters that state controlled paper money has facilitated throughout history, which have in turn had global repercussions. As Elliott Wave Principle put it, “That paper is no substitute for gold as a store of value is probably another of nature’s laws.”

That being said, it is also true, and crucial to wise investing, that markets come in both “bull” and “bear” types. Being a “gold bug” at the wrong time can be very costly in currency terms. For nearly three decades, gold and silver’s dollar price trends have confounded the precious metals enthusiasts, who for the entire period have argued that soaring gold and silver prices were “just around the corner” because the Fed’s policies “guarantee runaway inflation.” Yet today, 29 years after the January 1980 peaks in these metals and despite consistent inflation throughout this time, their combined dollar value (weighting each metal equally) is still 40 percent less than it was then.

It is all well and good to despise fiat money, but it is hardly useful to sit in gold and silver as if no other opportunities exist. In contrast to the one-note approach, which has had an immense opportunity cost since 1980, competent market analysis can help you make many timely and profitable financial decisions in all markets, including gold and silver.

For more in-depth, historical analysis and long-term forecasts for precious metals, download Prechter’s FREE 40-page eBook on Gold and Silver.

---

Robert Prechter, Certified Market Technician, is the founder and CEO of Elliott Wave International author of Wall Street best-sellers Conquer the Crash and Elliott Wave Principle and editor of The Elliott Wave Theorist monthly market letter since 1979.

Pretcher on Gold and Silver

April 2, 2009

By Nico Issac

In case you hadn't noticed: Over the past year of financial turmoil, the "safe haven" premium of precious metals has offered about as much support as a rubber ducky in a tsunami. Despite a string of powerful rallies, silver and gold remain well below their March 2008 peaks.

It goes without saying that the greatest opportunities in precious metals were not had by those who played the "disaster hedge" card; but rather by those who timed the trends as they developed, regardless of the fundamental backdrop.

Bob Prechter is in the latter group. Amidst the buzz and whirl of the most bullish backdrop in precious metals' recent history, gold and silver prices soared to new, all-time highs and calls for a "New Gold Rush" and "$30 Silver" flooded the mainstream airwaves. Yet Bob alerted subscribers to an approaching top in the March 14, 2008 Elliott Wave Theorist.

"The wave count [in silver] is nearly satisfied, though ideally it should end after one more new high. If this analysis is accurate, and silver does peak and begin a bear market, gold is likely to go down with it."

In the days that followed, prices in both metals fell off a cliff. In turn, Bob was asked to address his exceptional call for a turn down in a March 19, 2008 Bloomberg interview. Here are of excerpts from that conversation:

Bloomberg: "Why did you put out that call on Friday (March 14) about a peak in precious metals?"

Editor’s Note: You can download Bob Prechter’s 5-page report, Gold & Recessions, free from Elliott Wave International. It features 63 years of historical analysis that reveals how gold, T-notes, and the DJIA have performed in recessions and expansions.

Bob Prechter: "One of the reasons is that it seemed like an absolutely sure thing. We track several indicators of sentiment. One of them is the Daily Sentiment Index (DSI). That reached 98% bulls on a one-day basis going into this last high. We were tracking silver as well… as it is clearest in our minds. Now, at the time, we needed one more slightly new high. That happened Monday morning and silver dropped 15% in 48 hours. That's a heck of a reversal and I think it's real."

"Real" indeed: From their March peaks, gold prices plummeted 34%, alongside a 60% sell-off in silver before hitting the breaks in October. Here, the October 2008 Elliott Wave Financial Forecast prepared for a corrective rebound and wrote:

"Silver traced out a five-wave decline from its March peak…Gold should also rally as silver pushes higher. Once silver's rise is exhausted (initial target: $15.15), the larger downtrend should resume for both metals."

A powerful, four-month bounce ensued in both metals: Gold prices came within kissing distance of its March peak before turning down on February 20; silver followed suit -- a fulfillment of this bearish, near-term insight presented in the February 23 Elliott Wave Theorist:

"Silver has been clear as a bell. Silver is due to turn back down, and gold, which is back at $1000/oz, is likely to follow."

Since then, it's been a steady march lower for both metals. Obviously, EWI's forecasts do not always prove this accurate. Yet in this case the analysis speaks for itself.

---

For more metals analysis from Bob Prechter, download Gold & Recessions a free 5-page report from Elliott Wave International. It features 63 years of historical analysis that reveals how gold, T-notes, and the DJIA have performed in recessions and expansions.

---

Key To Trading Success: Ignore Nature's Laws?

March 25, 2009

The following is excerpted from Robert Prechter’s Independent Investor eBook. The 75-page eBook is a compilation of some of the New York Times bestselling author’s writings that challenge conventional financial market assumptions. Visit Elliott Wave International to download the eBook, free.

By Robert Prechter, CMT

…The natural tendency of people to apply physics to finance explains why successful traders are so rare and why they are so immensely rewarded for their skills. There is no such thing as a “born trader” because people are born — or learn very early — to respect the laws of physics. This respect is so strong that they apply these laws even in inappropriate situations. Most people who follow the market closely act as if the market is a physical force aimed at their heads. Buying during rallies and selling during declines is akin to ducking when a rock is hurtling toward you.

Successful traders learn to do something that almost no one else can do. They sell near the emotional extreme of a rally and buy near the emotional extreme of a decline. The mental discipline that a successful trader shows in buying low and selling high is akin to that of a person who sees a rock thrown at his head and refuses to duck. He thinks, I’m betting that the rock will veer away at the last moment, of its own accord. In this endeavor, he must ignore the laws of physics to which his mind naturally defaults. In the physical world, this would be insane behavior; in finance, it makes him rich.

Unfortunately, sometimes the rock does not veer. It hits the trader in the head. All he has to rely upon is percentages. He knows from long study that most of the time, the rock coming at him will veer away, but he also must take the consequences when it doesn’t. The emotional fortitude required to stand in the way of a hurtling stone when you might get hurt is immense, and few people possess it. It is, of course, a great paradox that people who can’t perform this feat get hurt over and over in financial markets and endure a serious stoning, sometimes to death. Many great truths about life are paradoxical, and so is this one.

---

Can the Government Stop Another Great Depression?

Can the Government Stop Another Great Depression?
January 13, 2009

The following article is excerpted from a recent issue Elliott Wave International’s Financial Forecast.

Elliott Wave International (EWI) is offering the full 10-page issue, entitled “The Most Important Investment Report You’ll Read in 2009,” free for a limited time. In addition to the following market commentary, it includes independent forecasts of stocks, bonds, metals, the U.S. dollar and economic trends.

Visit EWI to download the full report, free.

By Steve Hochberg and Pete Kendall
Editors of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast

As Conquer the Crash so boldly counseled, prosperity entails managing one’s finances and livelihood so as to be in tune with a 1930s’ style deflationary depression. But conventional wisdom disagrees. “There’s no comparison” to the Great Depression, says the world’s leading financial authority, U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke: “I’ve written books about the Depression. We didn’t have the social safety net that we have today. So let’s put that out of our minds.” He cites as evidence a 25% unemployment rate, a one-third decline in U.S. GDP and a 90% decline in stock prices, all of which occurred during the 1930s’ depression.

Unfortunately, what Bernanke’s managed to do is put one important word out of his mind—yet. Like the rest of the “this is no depression” camp, he fails to note that his cited figures are the extreme readings of that era. Bernanke also ignores the critical fact that today’s bear market is actually ahead of where the stock market was at the same point during the 1929-1932 decline and that the economy is lurching lower in a manner suggesting strongly that it will have little trouble keeping pace with the economic contraction of the 1930s (see Economy & Deflation section below).

Another common refrain is that, in contrast to the early 1930s, there are now competent financial authorities doing everything in their power to unlock the credit markets and reignite the bull market in equities. It’s certainly true that the Fed is doing everything in its power, and even some things that aren’t, to reel in the crisis. The U.S. Treasury is doing likewise. By Bianco Research’s tally, the potential total of U.S. bailouts is closing in on $9 trillion. But these efforts are every bit as impotent as Conquer the Crash and the September issue of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast suggested that they would be. Here’s the key quote from the September EWFF: “The bailouts keep coming at lower lows, signaling further declines ahead.” Incredibly to most people, since this quote appeared the Dow has declined by another 30% and various government financial wizards have put forward even bolder yet more haphazard “rescue” initiatives.

The ballooning bailout makes us more convinced than ever that it will fail. The whole “Keystone Cops” approach to “the rescue” strengthens our conviction. One day the bailout is aimed at jacking up asset prices; the next it is buying mortgages; the next it is rescuing the consumer; and the next it’s all-hands-on-deck to prop up whoever it is that happens to be failing on that day. The alphabet soup of rescue programs now includes ABCPMMMFLF (no, we didn’t make this up), which is supposed to “shore up” the $1 trillion asset-backed commercial paper markets. And still, credit spreads shoot higher.

Another program, the “systematically significant failing institutions program” (SSFIP), was established in November to deliver a $40 billion “equity injection” into AIG. The problem, which will probably become the focus of intense Congressional scrutiny at some later point, is that the injection was made in October, before the program even existed. The Wall Street Journal puts it this way: “Practically every day the government launches a massively expensive new initiative to solve the problems that the last day’s initiative did not.” At the latest economic summit in mid-November, the U.S. and other nations were reputedly “close to a deal to create a new ‘early warning system’ to detect weaknesses in the global financial system before they reach epic proportions.” Among the stated objectives: greater transparency. Of course, “sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because plans are still being worked out.” The real reason that these people want to remain anonymous is that like everyone else, they recognize the proportions of the unfolding epic and thus the futility of the bailout effort.

For more information on navigating the current market turmoil, including forecasts of stocks, bonds, metals, the U.S. dollar and economic trends, download Elliott Wave International’s free 10-page report, The Most Important Investment Report You’ll Read in 2009.

---

Steve Hochberg began his professional career with Merrill Lynch & Co. and joined Elliott Wave International in 1994. He became co-editor of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast for its inaugural issue in July 1999. Pete Kendall joined Elliott Wave International as a researcher in 1992. He has been co-editor of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast since its inception in July 1999. He is also the director of Elliott Wave International’s Center for Cultural Studies.

The Government Doesn’t Want You to Read This Article About the Financial Crisis

December 2, 2008

Editor’s Note: This article has been excerpted from a free issue of Robert Prechter’s monthly market letter, The Elliott Wave Theorist.

The full 10-page market letter, Be One of the Few The Government Hasn’t Fooled, can be downloaded free from Elliott Wave International.

By Robert Prechter, CMT

“Who Will Benefit From The Housing Act?”

This question is an actual headline from a national daily paper. The real answer is: mortgage lending corporations, developers, real estate agents, speculators and politicians. The government is also pledging tax money to providers of “financial counseling” and grants for speculators who want to “buy and renovate foreclosed housing”; in other words, it will hand tax money to charlatans and unfunded wheeler-dealers. But a far better headline would have been, “Whom Will the Housing Act Hurt?” The answer to that question is: (1) prudent people, i.e. savers, earners, renters and people who have waited to buy a house at a reasonable price; and (2) innocent people, i.e. taxpayers.

Government action (unless it is aimed at destruction) always causes the opposite of its stated effect. If taxpayers ultimately have to shoulder the burden for all the bad mortgage debt, those who are on the edge of being able to make their mortgage payments will be forced over the edge, causing more missed mortgage payments and more foreclosures.

There is never any need for a law granting privilege except when the goal is to reward the undeserving and to punish the innocent. If the goal were otherwise, there would be no need for a statutory law, because the natural laws of economics, when unencumbered, serve to reward the deserving and punish the imprudent and the guilty. Populists loudly challenge this idea, but they are wrong.

I thought the Fed was created to “help manage the economy.”

After a secret meeting on Jekyll Island (GA), Congress and a handful of bankers created the Federal Reserve System for two purposes. The first one was to allow the government to counterfeit money, thereby letting it steal value from savers through inflation. The second was to allow bankers to make profits through debt creation, also at the expense of savers. Any other claim is a smokescreen.

So shouldn’t we blame the Fed for the country’s financial problems?

That’s like blaming the collapse of your house on the biggest termite. The Fed is only one of the monsters that Congress has created. In the financial realm, others include Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, Sallie Mae, the FDIC, the FHA, the FHLBs and the income tax. But there are also a hundred other havoc-wreaking agencies of the federal government. Congress is to blame for ruining America. The Fed is only one of the mechanisms it created along the way. It’s a big one, and it’s fine to campaign against it, but to blame it for everything is to give its creator a free pass.

This is an important distinction, because many people seem to think that abolishing the Fed will cure America’s money woes. They seem to think that once the Fed is abolished, Congress will behave responsibly. One website even calls for abolishing the Fed in favor of giving money-printing power directly to the federal government! Abolishing the Fed is a worthy goal, but Congress will work tirelessly to create one disastrous institution after another, because that’s what campaign donors pay for.

---

For more information on the government’s role in the financial crisis, download Robert Prechter’s free 10-page market letter, Be One of the Few the Government Hasn’t Fooled.

Robert Prechter, Certified Market Technician, is the founder and CEO of Elliott Wave International, author of Wall Street best-sellers Conquer the Crash and Elliott Wave Principle and editor of The Elliott Wave Theorist monthly market letter since 1979.

Robert Prechter Explains the Price Effects of Inflation and Deflation

November 19, 2008

Editor’s Note: On Nov. 19, 2008, the U.S. Labor Department reported a 1 percent drop in the consumer price index for October 2008. The drop marked the largest decline in 61 years, and it was the first decline in that measure in nearly a quarter of a century. The 1 percent drop was twice as large as many mainstream analysts had forecast. Such a large decline in consumer prices is forcing U.S. policymakers to rethink the possibility of deflation in America. For more on deflation, we turn to Robert Prechter, the man who literally wrote a book on how to survive it. The following article, adapted from Prechter’s book Conquer the Crash – You Can Survive and Prosper in a Deflationary Depression, will help you understand exactly what to expect from deflation.

In addition to this article, visit Elliott Wave International to download the free 8-page report, Inflation vs. Deflation. It contains details on which threat you should prepare for and steps you can take to protect your money.

By Robert Prechter, CMT

Before explaining the price effects of inflation and deflation, we must define the terms inflation, deflation, money, credit and debt.

Webster's says, "Inflation is an increase in the volume of money and credit relative to available goods," and "Deflation is a contraction in the volume of money and credit relative to available goods."

Money is a socially accepted medium of exchange, value storage and final payment. A specified amount of that medium also serves as a unit of account.

According to its two financial definitions, credit may be summarized as a right to access money. Credit can be held by the owner of the money, in the form of a warehouse receipt for a money deposit, which today is a checking account at a bank. Credit can also be transferred by the owner or by the owner's custodial institution to a borrower in exchange for a fee or fees – called interest – as specified in a repayment contract called a bond, note, bill or just plain IOU, which is debt. In today's economy, most credit is lent, so people often use the terms "credit" and "debt" interchangeably, as money lent by one entity is simultaneously money borrowed by another.

When the volume of money and credit rises relative to the volume of goods available, the relative value of each unit of money falls, making prices for goods generally rise. When the volume of money and credit falls relative to the volume of goods available, the relative value of each unit of money rises, making prices of goods generally fall. Though many people find it difficult to do, the proper way to conceive of these changes is that the value of units of money are rising and falling, not the values of goods.

The most common misunderstanding about inflation and deflation – echoed even by some renowned economists – is the idea that inflation is rising prices and deflation is falling prices. General price changes, though, are simply effects of inflation and deflation.

The price effects of inflation can occur in goods, which most people recognize as relating to inflation, or in investment assets, which people do not generally recognize as relating to inflation. The inflation of the 1970s induced dramatic price rises in gold, silver and commodities. The inflation of the 1980s and 1990s induced dramatic price rises in stock certificates and real estate. This difference in effect is due to differences in the social psychology that accompanies inflation and disinflation, respectively.

The price effects of deflation are simpler. They tend to occur across the board, in goods and investment assets simultaneously.

…………….

For more information on deflation and inflation, including money-saving steps for protecting your wealth, download Elliott Wave International’s free 8-page report, Inflation vs. Deflation.

Robert Prechter, Certified Market Technician, is the founder and CEO of Elliott Wave International, author of Wall Street best-sellers Conquer the Crash and Elliott Wave Principle and editor of The Elliott Wave Theorist monthly market letter since 1979.

Why Your FDIC-Backed Bank Could Fail

With big bank bailouts dominating the news, there’s no better time to get the truth about bank safety.

This informative article has been excerpted from Bob Prechter’s New York Times bestseller Conquer the Crash. Unlike recent news articles that are responding to the banking crisis, it was published in 2002 before anyone was even talking about bank safety. However, you may find the information even more valuable today than ever before.

For even more information on bank safety, visit Elliott Wave International to download the free 10-page report, Discover the Top 100 Safest U.S. Banks. It contains details on how you can protect your money from the current financial crisis, updated for 2008.

Risks in Banking

Between 1929 and 1933, 9000 banks in the United States closed their doors. President Roosevelt shut down all banks for a short time after his inauguration. In December 2001, the government of Argentina froze virtually all bank deposits, barring customers from withdrawing the money they thought they had. Sometimes such restrictions happen naturally, when banks fail; sometimes they are imposed. Sometimes the restrictions are temporary; sometimes they remain for a long time.

Why do banks fail? For nearly 200 years, the courts have sanctioned an interpretation of the term “deposits” to mean not funds that you deliver for safekeeping but a loan to your bank. Your bank balance, then, is an IOU from the bank to you, even though there is no loan contract and no required interest payment. Thus, legally speaking, you have a claim on your money deposited in a bank, but practically speaking, you have a claim only on the loans that the bank makes with your money.

If a large portion of those loans is tied up or becomes worthless, your money claim is compromised. A bank failure simply means that the bank has reneged on its promise to pay you back. The bottom line is that your money is only as safe as the bank’s loans. In boom times, banks become imprudent and lend to almost anyone. In busts, they can’t get much of that money back due to widespread defaults. If the bank’s portfolio collapses in value, say, like those of the Savings & Loan institutions in the U.S. in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the bank is broke, and its depositors’ savings are gone.

Because U.S. banks are no longer required to hold any of their deposits in reserve, many banks keep on hand just the bare minimum amount of cash needed for everyday transactions. Others keep a bit more. According to the latest Fed figures, the net loan-to-deposit ratio at U.S. commercial banks is 90 percent. This figure omits loans considered “securities” such as corporate, municipal and mortgage-backed bonds, which from my point of view are just as dangerous as everyday bank loans. The true loan-to-deposit ratio, then, is 125 percent and rising. Banks are not just lent to the hilt; they’re past it.

Some bank loans, at least in the current benign environment, could be liquidated quickly, but in a fearful market, liquidity even on these so-called “securities” will dry up. If just a few more depositors than normal were to withdraw money, banks would have to sell some of these assets, depressing prices and depleting the value of the securities remaining in their portfolios. If enough depositors were to attempt simultaneous withdrawals, banks would have to refuse. Banks with the lowest liquidity ratios will be particularly susceptible to runs in a depression. They may not be technically broke, but you still couldn’t get your money, at least until the banks’ loans were paid off.

You would think that banks would learn to behave differently with centuries of history to guide them, but for the most part, they don’t. The pressure to show good earnings to stockholders and to offer competitive interest rates to depositors induces them to make risky loans. The Federal Reserve’s monopoly powers have allowed U.S. banks to lend aggressively, so far without repercussion. For bankers to educate depositors about safety would be to disturb their main source of profits. The U.S. government’s Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation guarantees to refund depositors’ losses up to $100,000, which seems to make safety a moot point. Actually, this guarantee just makes things far worse, for two reasons. First, it removes a major motivation for banks to be conservative with your money. Depositors feel safe, so who cares what’s going on behind closed doors? Second, did you know that most of the FDIC’s money comes from other banks? This funding scheme makes prudent banks pay to save the imprudent ones, imparting weak banks’ frailty to the strong ones. When the FDIC rescues weak banks by charging healthier ones higher “premiums,” overall bank deposits are depleted, causing the net loan-to-deposit ratio to rise.

This result, in turn, means that in times of bank stress, it will take a progressively smaller percentage of depositors to cause unmanageable bank runs. If banks collapse in great enough quantity, the FDIC will be unable to rescue them all, and the more it charges surviving banks in “premiums,” the more banks it will endanger. Thus, this form of insurance compromises the entire system. Ultimately, the federal government guarantees the FDIC’s deposit insurance, which sounds like a sure thing. But if tax receipts fall, the government will be hard pressed to save a large number of banks with its own diminishing supply of capital. The FDIC calls its sticker “a symbol of confidence,” and that’s exactly what it is.

---

For more information on bank safety, including how to choose a safe bank during the current financial crisis, download EWI’s free 10-page report, Discover the Top 100 Safest U.S. Banks.

Has Cash Been King for the Past 10 Years?

If you're like most investors, you've been nearly brainwashed with conventional market "wisdom" that stocks are the best way to grow your portfolio.

You would be crazy not to have your money in the markets, right?

But when markets drop, as we've seen in this credit crisis, it's amazing how quickly the story changes.

Steve Hochberg and Pete Kendall, editors of Elliott Wave International's Financial Forecast, challenged the notion of stocks' superiority years before this latest downturn.

Learn how cash has been king – and will remain so – far longer than the latest news headlines may have you believe in this free excerpt from Elliott Wave International's Credit Crisis Survival Kit.

Elliott Wave International has also made the full Credit Crisis Survival Kit available free for a limited time. In addition to this excerpt, it contains 14 other articles, reports, and videos that reveal how to survive and prosper during the credit crisis. Visit EWI to download the kit, free.

Cash's Invisible Reign Made Visible
[excerpted from Elliott Wave Financial Forecast, August 2008]

With respect to cash and its status as the preeminent financial asset, however, we are starting to wonder if investors will ever come around to our point of view, which, as we explained in the March special section, is that there are times when "the phrase 'focus on the long term' means "get out and wait.'" As we also pointed out, the last eight years are clearly one of these times, as cash has outperformed all three major stock averages over this period. A July 3 USA Today article shows how this outlook is actually becoming more farsighted as the bear market intensifies:

3-month Treasuries Beat
S&P 500 for past 10 Years

The article says, "Investors who bought stocks for the long run are finding out just how long the long run can be." But the farther back in time cash's dominance stretches and the rockier the stock market gets, the farther investors seem to move from ever taking anything off the table. After stating that "there can be times, long times, when stocks won't beat T-bills," a professor and popular buy-and-hold advocate is cited as "optimistic that the next 10 years will be better than the past decade." In March EWFF stated, "Cash will continue to outperform until stocks are no longer fashionable." There is no sign that such a condition is even close to happening.

It's somewhat amazing that cash is not capturing anyone's fancy because a tremendous society-wide thirst for cash is spreading fast. "In a deflation," the Elliott Wave Financial Forecast has stated, "Rule No. 1 is to unload everything that isn't nailed down. Rule No. 2 is to sell whatever everything remaining is nailed to." The banking system is surely deflating, because, echoing Elliott Wave Financial Forecast's wording again, "Desperate American Banks Are Selling Everything That Isn't Nailed Down." SunTrust is selling its stock in Coca-Cola, an asset the bank held for 90 years. Merrill Lynch sold its founding stake in Bloomberg as well as various other subsidiaries.

Meanwhile, "Americans are selling prized possessions online and at flea markets at alarming rates." Pawnshops and auction sites are booming. At Craigslist.org, the number of for-sale listings soared 70% in eight months. This fits with our review of Craigslist's prospects when it was getting started in 2005: "This is just the set-up phase. Once the global garage sale really gets rolling, truly astounding volumes of dirt-cheap goods will be available on-line and elsewhere." The global garage sale is on. The chart of the U.S. savings rate shows that the bull market in cash has come to life.

A 30-year downtrend in savings rates ended at minus 2.3% in August 2005. In May 2008, the savings rate skyrocketed to 5%. This jolt may be somewhat overstated due to the arrival of the government's stimulus checks, but the burst should be the start of a critical new mindset among consumers. When the government showered the economy with $600 checks, many did something they never would have thought of through most of the bull market: They put the money in the bank, which is exactly what the administration did not want. In fact, federal, state and local governments are desperate for the tax revenue that a little ripple-effect spending would have generated.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, states must close a $40 billion shortfall in the current fiscal year. "The problem today is that tax revenue is vanishing," says a story about the sudden appearance of the worst fiscal crisis in New York since 1975. Even cities like East Hampton, New York, where someone paid $103 million for an oceanfront house last year, are out of money. "Nobody understands how it happened," says one resident. The pages of this newsletter show otherwise. If we are right, a deflationary decline is depleting and destroying cash flows in novel new ways that no one alive has experienced before.

The previous analysis was excerpted from Elliott Wave International's Credit Crisis Survival Kit. The kit, featuring 15 free resources to help you survive and prosper during the credit crisis, is available free. Visit EWI to download the kit, free.

Three Questions

3 Questions The Government Doesn’t Want You To Ask About the Financial Crisis
(And 3 Shocking Answers!)

September 22, 2008
Bob Prechter, President of Elliott Wave International (EWI), is no stranger to challenging the status quo. His New York Times bestseller, Conquer the Crash, was published in 2002 before anyone was even talking about the current financial crisis.
In his recent 10-page market letter, Prechter shifts his focus to the government’s role in the latest financial turmoil.

Elliott Wave International is offering the full 10-page report free if you’d like to read all 28 answers. Visit EWI to download the full report, free.
Here are 3 questions excerpted from the free report:

1. Didn’t Congress create the Federal Housing Authority, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae and the Federal Home Loan Banks for the purpose of helping the public buy homes?
You’re kidding, right? What happened is that clever businessmen schemed with members of Congress to create privileged lending institutions so they could get rich off the public’s labor. In return, members of Congress got big campaign contributions from the privileged corporations and, as a bonus, even more votes. The public’s welfare had nothing to do with it.

Who celebrated when Congress passed the latest housing bill? Answer: “The California Mortgage Bankers Association applauded Congress for permanently increasing the size of loans Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can buy….” (USA, 7/28) The legislation exists to “protect the nation’s two largest mortgage companies….” (NYT, 7/24) Who took out full-page ads to encourage Congress to “enact housing stimulus legislation now”? Answer: the National Association of Home Builders.

Who celebrated when the administration “unveiled a new set of best [sic] practices designed to encourage banks to issue a debt instrument known as a covered bond”? Answer: “[Treasury Secretary] Paulson was joined at the news conference by officials from the Federal Reserve [and] the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation…. Officials from banking giants Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. issued a joint statement saying, ‘We look forward to being leading issuers’” (AP, 7/29) of covered bonds. And voters still believe that Congress is there to help the needy.

2. Who cares if a bank goes under? Won’t the FDIC protect depositors?
The FDIC is not funded well enough to bail out even a handful of the biggest banks in America. It has enough money to pay depositors of about three big banks. After that, it’s broke. But here is the real irony:

The FDIC, as history will ultimately demonstrate, causes banks to fail. The FDIC creates destruction three ways. First, its very existence encourages banks to take lending risks that they would never otherwise contemplate, while it simultaneously removes depositors’ incentives to keep their bankers prudent. This double influence produces an unsound banking system. We have reached that point today.

Second, the FDIC imposes costly rules on banks. In July, it “implemented a new rule…requiring the 159 [largest] banks to keep records that will give quick access to customer information.” As the American Bankers Association puts it, the new rule “will impose a lot of burden on a lot of banks for no reason.” (AJC, 7/19)

Third, the FDIC gets its money in the form of “premiums” from—guess whom?—healthy banks! So as weak banks go under, the FDIC can wring more money from still-solvent banks. If it begins calling in money during a systemic credit implosion, marginal banks will go under, requiring more money for the FDIC, which will have to take more money from banks, breaking more marginal banks, etc.

The FDIC could continue this behavior until all banks are bust, but it will more likely give up and renege. Remember, every government program ultimately brings about the opposite of the stated goal, and the FDIC is no exception.

3. Who are the “homeowners”?
Everywhere you turn, news articles are discussing how Congress, the President and the Fed are taking action to “help homeowners.” People’s understanding of this statement is 100 percent wrong. The homeowners in question are not the residents of the houses. The homeowners are banks.

Unlike some states, Georgia made its law very specific on this point. Our local paper recently explained that, by recognizing the reality of ownership, “Georgia employs primarily a nonjudicial foreclosure” and therefore “has one of the fastest procedures in the country.” Specifically, “The property owner gives the mortgage holder a ‘security deed’ or a ‘deed to secure debt’.

Technically, until the debt is paid, in full, the mortgage holder owns the property and allows the borrower to possess it.” (GT, 8/6) In states where the mortgage holder is deemed the property owner, the title is merely a legal technicality.

The day he stops making mortgage payments, he no longer owns the property; the bank does. After foreclosure, many of those whom politicians and the media call homeowners will simply go from paying interest to a bank to paying rent to a landlord. For those with little or no equity, it’s not that big a deal. The real devastation is happening in banks’ portfolios, and banks, not home-dwellers, are the ones whom the government is trying to rescue, at others’ expense.

One might be tempted to charge therefore that Congress makes its laws for the purpose of helping banks. This idea, too, is incorrect. Helping banks is merely a side effect. The reason that Congress creates privileges for bankers is to benefit politicians. They make laws in response to campaign contributions from lending institutions, real-estate organizations and builders’ associations. They also garner votes from mortgage holders and, miraculously, from voters who think that their “representatives” are being “compassionate.”

The previous 3 questions and answers from Bob Prechter were excerpted from his recent 10-page market letter, The Elliott Wave Theorist.
Elliott Wave International is offering the full 10-page report free if you’d like to read all 28 answers. Visit EWI to download the full report free

Why the bailouts won't work

Each morning lately brings new revelations about how the U.S. government is trying to save Wall Street and the economy from falling into complete disarray. Examples from Friday's (9/19/08) news: a ban on short selling, the government guaranteeing money market funds up to $50 billion and promising to buy distressed mortgages from banks and institutions. Prior to these plans, the Fed announced it would bail out the huge mortgage guarantors, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Bob Prechter supplies some much-needed perspective about the plan to bail out Fannie and Freddie in his most recent Elliott Wave Theorist.

Excerpted from The Elliott Wave Theorist, September 2008

More Q&A: Righting Some Misconceptions About The Latest BailoutNow that the government is bailing out Fannie and Freddie…

The government is not “bailing out Fannie and Freddie.” If these companies were allowed to fail, all that would happen is that creditors would divvy up their assets and sell them off, taking their lumps in the process. The speculators in credit default swaps (CDSs) who were right would justly win their bets, and the losers would have to pay. If the losers over-promised, they would have to sell off their own assets.

So whom are the feds bailing out? They are bailing out the creditors who bought the IOUs that these companies created and the insurers who collected premiums on insurance against a fall in the value of Fannie and Freddie’s mortgages and mortgage-backed bonds. The guilty parties won’t have to pay, and the Chinese government, the “top foreign holder of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds,” won’t have to learn a lesson about investing.

Politicians are shifting all that greed and stupidity onto the innocent, the by-definition prudent, American taxpayer and saver. To be even more precise, the government is bailing out the dumbest creditors. Smart ones got out early. As EWFF reported in July 2004, “The European Central Bank has already eliminated its holdings of bonds issued by Fannie and Freddie and urged other European banks to do the same.” Only the dumbest investors own this stuff, and the government is disallowing them from learning something useful. In exchange, it is teaching taxpayers and savers a brutal lesson in civics.

Wasn’t the bailout necessary to save the financial system?
Government officials and newspaper editorials, even those from skeptical writers, have been unanimous in claiming that a bailout, no matter how unpleasant, was “necessary.” But this is nonsense. The only thing that has changed, the only thing the government can ever change, is who pays. A week ago, people on the hook were speculators who voluntarily took responsibility for losses when they grabbed the opportunity for gains.

In fact, they have already booked years of gains, in the form of interest payments, along the way. Now, those on the hook are people who had nothing to do with the transactions in the first place. This bailout will drain money from people who are solvent and thereby damage the financial system more in the long run.

Producers and savers are the very people upon whom recoveries depend. By shifting the losses onto them, the government has now assured the ultimate devastation of the entire financial system. The bailout is not just unnecessary; it is another disaster.

Don’t many banks and funds have supplemental insurance to protect themselves?

Tons of it. Insurers have written $62 trillion worth of credit-default swaps. Banks have private deposit insurance. But you have to understand: These seeming guarantees have been part of the problem, because they have given speculators a false sense of security. Insurers wrote them when they believed the system was risk-free. CDSs became speculative vehicles, and the liabilities at this point are way too big to cover. Additionally, many of the deals are complex and nearly opaque as to who owes what to whom. Insurance is always available when there is nothing to fear, but it goes away when big trouble looms.

A subsidiary of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway company just announced (9/10) that it will stop offering supplemental deposit insurance to the 1500 banks it was covering. As you can see, it offered the insurance to make money, not to protect banks. Now that banks need protection, there is no more insurance. Still, one can hardly blame an insurance company for getting out of the business. Insurance is supposed to provide a way for prudent people voluntarily to socialize their risks. But when profligacy puts everyone at risk, insurance is impossible. In a depression, insurance companies stop insuring because they fail. Washington Mutual bank, reportedly in trouble, is 7.5 times as big as the biggest bank that’s ever failed in the U.S. Buffet is just acting ahead of the disaster. The government never acts ahead of disaster, so when the FDIC stops providing insurance, it will be because it has no choice.

Bleak Midwinter for Housing and Lending

Suddenly, It's a Bleak Midwinter for Housing and Lending
By Susan C. Walker, Elliott Wave International
January 7, 2008
In the bleak midwinter,
Frosty wind made moan,
Earth stood hard as iron,
Water like a stone…
(From "A Christmas Carol" by Christina Rossetti)

Shawn Colvin sings a beautiful song based on this poem by Christina Rossetti, reminding us of the bleakness of midwinter. That is exactly where the housing market seems to be now – facing its very own bleak midwinter of falling prices, rising mortgage rates and growing inventories.

The latest report of the S&P/Case-Shiller home price index shows that the price of houses fell 6.7% in October, year over year. That is the largest year-to-year decline drop since April 1991. Think of it – if you had bought a home for $300,000 in October 2006, it is now worth about $280,000. And suppose you just got a new job and need to move? You are going to have trouble selling it at that price, too, thanks to so many foreclosed homes on the market. One realtor in Phoenix explained to a Wall Street Journal reporter that local residents are now competing with foreclosed homes selling for $50,000 to $100,000 less than other houses on the market. "The sellers now are having to reduce their prices by 20% to 30% to compete," she says. (Wall Street Journal, "Pace of Decline in Home Prices Sets a Record," 12/27/07)

At a meeting of the New York Society of Security Analysts on January 7, U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said this about the U.S. economy: "We will likely have further indications of slower growth in the weeks and months ahead.''

Paulson and central bankers at the U.S. Federal Reserve recognize that they, too, face their own bleak financial midwinter. It's not just the mayhem brought on by the subprime mortgage debacle, the implosion of the housing market and the ensuing credit crunch; nor is it that the U.S. economy lurches toward a recession and hard times.

No, it is something bigger than that. Public opinion or social mood, as we call it here at Elliott Wave International, has shifted from positive to negative. When that happens, financial heroes find themselves falling from their pedestals onto frozen earth hard as iron.

Exhibit A - The headline of a recent article on Bloomberg: "Paulson Gets Diminishing Return with Bush, Like Powell, O'Neill" and the lead: "Henry Paulson escaped the Nixon White House with his reputation enhanced. He won't be so lucky this time around."

Exhibit B - The lead from a recent column by David Ignatius in the Washington Post:

"When airport rescue crews are worried that a damaged plane may have a crash landing, they sometimes spread the runway with foam to reduce the probability of fire on impact. That's what the Federal Reserve and other central banks are doing in pumping liquidity into severely damaged financial markets. Make no mistake: The central bankers' announcement Wednesday of a new coordinated effort to pump cash into the global financial system is a sign of their nervousness…."

Nervousness is in the air now. Investors are anxious about the markets; everyone is worried about the housing market. Our Elliott Wave Financial Forecast December issue explains how housing starts (and stops) are intimately tied to recessions: "One key indicator of success in pre-dating economic downturns is housing starts, which are approaching the 1-million-a-month level that has preceded all recessions of the last 40 years."

And the Fed is nervous, too. So much so that it announced a credit giveaway with four other major central banks (the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the Swiss National Bank) in mid-December to try to bolster the financial system and the banks that keep it humming. The Fed reports that banks have been stepping up to its auction window each week to purchase $20 billion. Unfortunately for the banks, most of this "liquidity" isn't that liquid. It has to be paid back within 30 days, with interest of about 4.65%.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor's note: Elliott Wave International has agreed to make available to our readers a 2-1/2-page excerpt from Bob Prechter's Elliott Wave Theorist in which he describes exactly how the Fed's latest effort to shore up banks' balance sheets has become "High Noon for the Fed's Credibility." Click here to read the Theorist excerpt.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just how bleak is the future for central bankers if this recently implemented plan doesn't work? Bob Prechter explains in his just-published Theorist:

"Nevertheless, this is probably the single most important central-bank pronouncement yet. But it is not significant for the reasons people think. By far most people take such pronouncements at face value, presume that what the authorities promise will happen and reason from there. But the tremendous significance of this seismic engagement of the monetary jawbone is that if this announcement fails to restore confidence, central bankers' credibility will evaporate."

"At least that's the way historians will play it. But of course, the true causality, as elucidated by socionomics, is that an evaporation of confidence will make the central bankers' plans fail. The outcome is predicated on psychology."

The "socionomics" Prechter refers to is a new social science he has introduced that studies how humans behave in groups within contexts of uncertainty – where fluctuations in social mood motivate social actions. It explains that rather than an event happening that affects social mood (for example, falling home prices make people feel bad), what really happens is that social mood changes first from positive to negative and then lousy things happen (for example, unhappy people make home prices fall). If you can adopt this point of view, then you can see that, in poetic terms, we are fast approaching a bleak midwinter for the economy and the financial markets.

Susan C. Walker writes for Elliott Wave International, a market forecasting and technical analysis company. She has been an associate editor with Inc. magazine, a newspaper writer and editor, an investor relations executive and a speechwriter for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Her columns also appear regularly on FoxNews.com.

How to Recognise a Financial Mania

How To Recognize a Financial Mania When You're Smack Dab in the Middle of One By Susan C. Walker, Elliott Wave InternationalNovember 12, 2007
When you're caught in the middle of a bad storm, you don't really care whether it's a tropical depression or a full-strength hurricane. You just know you're hanging on for dear life. The same idea applies to financial markets. When a market is trending up strongly, it's hard to tell whether it's just a bull market or a more dangerous financial mania.
The recent tremendous ride up for global and U.S. financial markets, including the Dow, looks and feels more like a mania than a mere bull, says Elliott Wave International analyst Peter Kendall. This distinction is important to recognize in the rising stage, because manias always result in a crash that takes them back beneath their starting point.
Kendall recently published his research into current financial manias throughout the world in SFO (Stocks, Futures and Options) magazine. The article, titled "Financial Manias and the Trade of a Lifetime," suggests an even more stunning finish for the current manias: "The speed and global scope of the unfolding credit crisis suggest that most of the fast-rising markets of the last decade will crash in unison," he writes.
Editor's note: Elliott Wave International invites you to read the full five-page article with charts from the October 2007 SFO magazine by Elliott Wave International's Pete Kendall called "Financial Manias and the Trade of a Lifetime."
As co-editor of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast, Kendall searches for trends that help traders to move in and out of markets. By comparing other historic manias with the impressive rise of the DJIA since the late 1970s, he focuses on the skyscraper pattern that they all have in common. The four historical manias are the Dutch Tulip mania of the 1630s, the South Sea bubble of 1720, the U.S. stock crash of 1921-1932 and the dot.com bust of the 1990s and early 2000s. Once you can see the similarities, you will be better prepared to face the music when the crash comes. As Kendall writes, "once the belief that the markets will always rise becomes widespread, it actually signals the start of a price swing that tends to be a career-breaker for any trader who tries to oppose it."
He also discusses current manias, such as the Nikkei, which has yet to return to its start after a manic rise to its all-time high in December 1989, and the Dow, which reversed from its rise in 2000 but made a U-turn in 2002. The starting point for the Dow's mania as shown in the chart included in the article is at the 1000 level.
Kendall, who is also writing a book about financial manias, titled The Mania Chronicles, describes five telltale signs that help an investor to tell the difference between a regular bull market and a mania. It's a mania if:
1. There is no upside resistance, and rising prices seem to be perpetual.2. Everyone in the market looks like an expert.3. There is a flight from quality investments to riskier investments.4. As financial bubbles pop in one area, they bubble up in others.5. The crash after the peak takes back all the gains the mania made.
No. 5 can be viewed only with hindsight. But the first four signs provide essential clues to what's shaping up in the markets.
"By studying past mania experiences, traders can gain valuable insight into the collective emotions that drive their markets," writes Kendall. "It's possible to make significant money in the advancing stages of a mania with no knowledge of its existence. But there is nothing like recognizing a mania for what it is in real time to help a trader keep those gains and deal with the relentless crash after it peaks."
In the last part of the SFO article, he asks the key question, Are we at the peak yet? Find out his answer by reading the whole article for yourself.
Susan C. Walker writes for Elliott Wave International, a market forecasting and technical analysis company. She has been an associate editor with Inc. magazine, a newspaper writer and editor, an investor relations executive and a speechwriter for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Her columns also appear regularly on FoxNews.com.