Newsletters - Past Issues

Update MONEY MATTERS READ ! 12/13/2021

It is said the markets always come back from stock crashes, and indeed tracking the Dow from its inception, it has.

That said, why do investors wring their hands and lose sleep whenever the market suffers a severe setback?

Its human nature to abhor losing money. Especially if it is your life savings. Moreover, even if we are fully aware of the markets perfect track record of returning to an upward trajectory, the demons of the mind never fail to play havoc with our psyche and conjure up thoughts of losing it all in a horrendous market wipe out.

If you have experienced these feelings during market crashes, you are not alone. Almost everyone I know, both professionals and novice investors alike, have fallen victim to the “what ifs” of an Armageddon-like moment in the markets. Investors then oscillate between sitting tight or selling out.

Few if any will actually buy more stock once the freight train of a major crash gets rolling.

It takes a bulletproof mindset to stay calm as thousands of dollars disappear down the rat hole of a Wall Street crash.

Most investors will call their advisor and want him or her to give them at least some semblance of a warm and fuzzy feeling that all is ok. The buy and hold mantra anchors the argument and indeed, during the many crashes I have seen, most will try and grin and bear out a market crash. Better yet, maybe “grit and bear it” is a more suitable term.

In any case, the question becomes:  can the market ever crash, defy historical precedent, and fail to come back in a once in a lifetime final or prolonged wipe out?

For that type of market crash to occur, it would have to be a prolonged and wealth obliterating event, somewhere in the order of an 80% retracement of the markets, much like we saw in 1929. That event witnessed a 73% retracement between 1929 and 1932 and didn’t recover for 25 years, not counting for inflation. Ouch.

What could cause such a crash?

In my opinion, it’s unlikely the excessive speculation we saw in the 1920’s would cause a similar event now. That sort of speculation already exists on certain levels in today’s markets. More likely, it would be an economic catastrophe along the lines of a Mexican Peso moment. In other words, a currency crisis brought on by monetary inflation (money printing and massive deficit spending).

Should investors do anything to prepare for such an event?


It’s likely the majority of investors and advisors think the possibility of such an occurrence is so remote, no preparation is necessary. I would counter this argument by notating the most important consideration by professional traders and money managers alike is loss prevention and control. Iconic investor Warren Buffett says the two most important rules of investing are:

  1. Don’t lose money
  2. Don’t forget rule one

 

I don’t know a professional trader nor money manager worth their salt that does not use loss prevention techniques in an attempt to limit losses when and if they occur. If the pros use loss prevention techniques, why don’t mom and pop investors and their advisors use them as well? 

Good question.

A crash of the magnitude of which I am talking about could obliterate one’s life savings for good or at least for an extended period of time. With that in mind, to not consider some sort of loss prevention in the face of what kind of damage could be inflicted on retirement savings is, in my opinion, foolhardy. The possibility of the event may be remote, but if it occurs, you would have wished you had some sort of loss prevention strategy in the worst way.

This article is opinion only of Marc Cuniberti, and may not represent those of this news media and should not be construed as investment advice nor represents the opinion of any bank, investment or advisory firm.  Neither Money Management Radio (“Money Matters”) nor Bay Area Process receive, control, access or monitor client funds, accounts, or portfolios.  Contact: (530)559-1214 or news@moneymanagementradio

 


 

A note from Greg Guenthner

A note from Greg Guenthner

 

That was ugly.

The morning relief rally began sputtering in the early afternoon. Then, once the averages went negative, the selling really picked up, cascading stocks lower into the closing bell.

The Nasdaq Composite led the way down with a drop of 1.8%. But keep in mind, that’s actually a 3.5% drop from its morning highs. Once again, the tech-growth names that started showing cracks late last month were the stocks that were hammered yesterday.

Bottom line: Yesterday’s action is about as bad as it gets. The absolute worst thing you want to see after a drop is a relief rally where the averages gap higher, then sell off in the afternoon. That’s textbook distribution. Investors are selling the rips… and it’s starting to feel a little panicky out there.

Here are some numbers as I screen through some charts this morning:

More than 830 stocks listed on the Nasdaq are down more than 10% this week. 70 are down at least 20%…

More than 60 S&P 500 components are down double-digits this week as well…

If it wasn't for some of the market's biggest names propping up the averages, this action would appear much, much worse...

Cathie Wood's ARKK lost almost 7% yesterday and is now down more than 20% from its Nov. highs.

We can use ARKK as a proxy for the tech-growth trade. These are the most hyped growth names on the planet...

We could get a kick-save later this week. But overall, this looks like big trouble to me. ARKK has retraced its entire Q4 2020 - Q1 2021 melt-up rally, after consolidating for almost a year. That looks toppy to me. The combination of "lockdown" favorites such as ZM, along with some of the higher-flying software names has proven poisonous here.

In fact, the two "opposing" themes of lockdown and reopen are both suffering. Airlines, travel names, casios, etc have awful looking charts right now. But so do lockdown names like PTON and ZM.

The averages are green right now, but nothing too exciting going on.

AAPL and some chip names are dragging on the Nasdaq, it feels heavy right now.

Careful out there today!

 

 

Gold is looking terrible today so let’s cut our losses so we can move onto better plays.

Elsewhere, LEN is looking great... it's been our refuge during this volatility storm. I appreciate the effort from FCX but it has a lot of work to do.

That’s it for today, let’s see what the afternoon brings.

Happy trading,

Greg Guenthner

Greg Guenthner
Editor, The Weekly Fortune Alliance
AskGreg@StPaulResearch.com

 


 

Insanity reigns supreme in the markets Are the gremlins at work? Update 11 29 2021 READ

Insanity reigns supreme in markets

 

The economy continues to give analysts much to dwell on, as it seems like almost daily we get more news, some of it making sense and some of it not so much.


 

Predicament or Problem? Market update 11 17 2021

 

Predicament or Problem?

 

 

It is said that problems have solutions, whereas predicaments only have outcomes. If that is true, the U.S. economy’s future and indeed our immediate way of life, awaits an outcome that the Feds can do nothing about. Ex-Federal Reserve Chief Alan Greenspan used the word conundrum on occasion, yet conundrums do have outcomes, they are just difficult ones.

The predicament we now find ourselves revolves around the subject of last week’s column about inflation, the latest one trillion dollar spending bill passed this weekend, and the six trillion or so spent during 20/21 for CoVid relief.

Deficit spending and inflation go hand in hand. There is no argument on that economic reality. The debate is not whether inflation follows massive deficit spending. It does, it is now, and everyone knows it. The question is can the Feds stop inflation if it gets out of hand. The answer is yes, they can, but that is not the predicament.

The question becomes what is the effect on the economy from using the known tools to stop inflation.

Therein lies the predicament.

If inflation begins to accelerate to unacceptable levels, and it going pretty fast now, real damage to the economy and its inhabitants will occur. The most obvious problem is people won’t be able to afford to buy the things they need. But as horrible as that is, that will be the least of our problems.

Really bad inflation, known as hyperinflation, or even approaching hyperinflation, can cause breakages in the economic system, many of which can actually stop it from predictably functioning.

The result of that is the normal economic signals that transmit what it happening in the marketplace, to those participating in it (which is anyone who has to procure anything), begin to fail, sending false or even misleading signals to all concerned, which again, is all of us.

Since markets (not just stock markets but all markets where things are sold) depend on accurate economic signals to regulate the flow of goods and services from suppliers to end users, when these signals fail, the normal flow of everything is interrupted or may even fail altogether. This can translate into empty store shelves at best, and chaos on many levels at worst.

For a recent but relatively inconvenient example of a market failure, just look at the job market, where unemployment levels are relatively high, in the midst of millions of unfilled jobs. In spite of rising prices, slowing unemployment checks and stimulus programs ending, employers still cannot find enough worker to fill staffing positions. Although a serious problem, it will pale in comparison of what will happen should we even get close to a hyperinflationary environment.

The tools to stop inflation are the same used for normal inflation, except on a much more drastic scale. The Fed would increase interest rates and likely not the quarter point increases we have seen in the past. Interest rates were increased 3% in one day in the 80’s. Experts agree an increase of this proportion would crash the economy in today’s environment. Social programs would have to be eliminated or drastically cut.  Government spending would have to be significantly cut. The Fed would have its hands tied to initiate more stimulus and bailouts as this is what caused the problem so those suffering would get little help from the government. Credit and loans would likely have to be recalled in an attempt to remove cash from the system. The credit markets would likely freeze up due  to the unpredictable yields of fast moving interest rates. Both government, business and individual balance sheets would explode due to rising interest rate costs to service existing debt. In essence, all hell would break loose, and the Feds, having only one tool in the proverbial toolbox (printing money) would be powerless to use it as that is what caused the problem in the first place.

Simply put, the predicament is that the very thing they would use to address the economic malady, caused the malady.

With no solution, the Feds have essentially painted themselves into a corner. Hence the statement, “print or die”, which always eventually morphs into “print and die”.

Not a happy ending I know.

This article is opinion only of Marc Cuniberti, and may not represent those of this news media and should not be construed as investment advice nor represents the opinion of any bank, investment or advisory firm.  Neither Money Management Radio (“Money Matters”) nor Bay Area Process receive, control, access or monitor client funds, accounts, or portfolios.  Contact: (530)559-1214 or news@moneymanagementradio.com

Approved Vantage 

 

 


 

The Trillion Dollar coin HALLOWEEN EDITION 2021

 

 

 

Can a trillion dollar coin make the deficits Ghosts disappear?

 

 

With the U.S. government running a 29 trillion dollar deficit (USDEBTCLOCK.ORG), with another 157 trillion in unfunded liabilities (debts not due yet but still owed) the additional 1.9 trillion stimulus proposal (the amount changes daily) is being hotly contested in Congress. Washington desperately wants to authorize this additional spending. Opponents of the bill from both parties point to the money already spent during CoVid (about 4.5 trillion) saying another two trillion is excessive and will add even more debt to an already bloated U.S. budget. Now a U.S. default approaches, which is only compounding the problem.

 

Keep reading..

 

 

Where there is a will there is a way, and an idea that was originally tossed about and discarded in last decade is once again up for discussion. The idea is to mint a platinum coin with a face value of one trillion dollars, then give that to the Federal Reserve of United States, who in turn would deposit it into the U.S. Treasury. Then the Treasury Department could essentially cash the coin back at the Federal Reserve to fund one trillion dollars in additional spending. The idea is with the theoretical $1 trillion coin on deposit, the government could pay its bills without additional borrowing, making the debt ceiling a nonissue and, therefore, averting a government shutdown. Since the coin would be legal tender per the original U.S. Coinage Act, it is essentially just making change from the coin to U.S. dollars, which it could then spend.

The idea is being pushed by, among others, Professor of Economics and Nobel Prize winner in Economic Sciences, Economist Paul Krugman. In his latest article (Oct 1, 2021) entitled “Wonking Out: Biden Should Ignore the Debt Limit and Mint a $1 Trillion Coin”, Krugman suggests the coin could provide a respectable solution to the spending plan and not officially increase the deficit. Krugman also suggests the coin does not have to actually contain a trillion dollars’ worth of platinum (that would be beyond huge), but would only have to be denominated as such.

If you find yourself scratching your head and trying to put the pieces together in your mind, you’re not alone. Not only did the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve nix the idea a few times in the last decade, the logic of it, well, defies logic.

That the coin is being seriously considered by the powers at be makes more than a few of us shake our heads.

More concerning is that the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve for the most part, not commenting much, nor outright killing the idea like they did way back when. We have to remember different people run these institutions now, and along with many other ideological changes, what seemed impossible a few short years ago is now on the proverbial table of consideration.

Not everyone in Washington is onboard with the idea.   Ex-Federal reserve chief now our Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, dismissed the of minting a $1 trillion coin as a last-ditch effort to help the United States pay its debt, saying the concept shouldn’t be considered seriously despite its popularity.

Like I said, where a will comes a way. I would ask why stop at a trillion? Why not stamp it 29 trillion and wipe out that nasty deficit once and for all?

Well the “for all” part is probably not going to happen. Wipe the deficit clean is like destroying a beaver dam. Get rid of it and you’ll likely find another in short order.  Wipe the deficit clean and do you think they would start running it back up again?

Me thinks so.

In any case, the very concept seems ludicrous. Why bother wasting the platinum? Just print a “one trillion dollars” on a lead fishing weight and be done with it.

Many analysts and economists doubt the coin idea will ever make it out of the concept stage, but if we have learned anything in the last six years or so, don’t bet against putting anything past those that rule us. It can get a whole lot wackier before we come to our senses.

 

Need Medicare?

Turning 65?

You only have a limited time to sign up without penalty and with no examination.  

Call me (530) 559 -1214

 

 

Vantage Notified 10 31 2021 email