|
Gold is Busting Out All
Over
|
 |
By Howard Katz
Nov 16 2009 10:18AM
|
 |
|
|
The gold stocks caught on fire over the past fortnight.
They have lagged behind the metal in relative strength, but, since they are
more volatile than the metal, bigger profits are the result. For
example, gold is well above its early September levels, but the XAU and the
HUI have only broken above their corresponding levels just last week.
Measuring from May 22, 2009, when I last resumed a full
bullish-gold position, the metal is up 16.5%. My Model Conservative
portfolio is up 33.6%. The further back you start, the prettier it gets.
For example, starting with the beginning of the grand cycle gold bull
market (early 2001), the price of gold has multiplied by 4.4
times. The HUI has multiplied by 12.4 times. Pretty it is, and pretty
it will continue. During the same time period the S&P is down 7%.
Yet all I hear from the establishment is the same mantra:
“Buy stocks. Stocks must go up. They always have. Don’t buy
gold. Gold is a collectable.” Sad, very sad. Beating
these people is like taking candy from a baby.
Last week I received a letter from a reader who poses some
interesting questions, questions I think many of you have. So I would like
to address these questions in hope that I can clear up some
confusions.
“I read your opinion pieces religiously.
I am by no means a wealthy man, or a learned
one.
My wife & I, have limited funds
saved.
I DO have about a 15% position in metals, but got in
late, at the $970s. Better than $1200, but still late.
My QUESTION for you, if you answer such
emails….
Is WHAT do I do with the U.S. Dollars I have left?
(before they become toilet paper?).
Where do I move them, NOW, to keep what we have
managed to save over a lifetime.
We are too old to start over, and our government is
going to cheat us out of the funds they STOLE over our
careers……
Medicare first, and then I am sure Social
Security.
I love it when they call these
entitlements.
That means FREE……
If they were FREE WHY did we PAY for them, (involuntarily) for
40 yrs?
I would love to have it back, and paying just 1-2% over
that 40 yrs…..then, I could afford to MOVE out of here, or pay
someone to give me SOLID advice for investments (not in the US
dollar/mkts).
Thanks, and I sincerely thank you for your expertise,
and articles.
Best Regards,
TS
Dear TS:
You have some understanding of our economic
situation. Still, I think that what I have to say will be a shock.
Seeing reality as it is can hurt, but it is the first step toward doing the
right thing so that you can improve your life.
First, what do you do with the US dollars you have left
before they become toilet paper? This should be answered on two levels. In
terms of the immediate situation, you should not have any US dollars left.
That is, whatever assets you have above and beyond short term expenses
should be in real goods.
In terms of the more distant future, you are fighting an
almost impossible problem. You are probably thinking in terms of
accumulating enough capital to retire. The point to understand is that in
today’s world it is (virtually) impossible to retire. This
is not merely your problem. Everyone has the same problem. You are merely
more perceptive than most and have recognized the problem. Let us do a
little compound interest problem such as you were taught in 8th grade math
class. Let us say that you start to work at age 16 and continue until
age 66, saving 15% of your salary each year and putting it in the savings
bank at 5% interest. If your salary is 32 oz. of gold per year, then you
save 15% x 32 oz. = 4.8 oz. of gold each year.
(To put this in context, the salary of the average American
in the middle of the “depression” (1932) was 56 oz. of gold per
year. In 1974 (when gold ownership was legalized again), the salary
of the average American was 40 oz. of gold per year. In 1987, it was
32 oz. of gold per year. And today it is also 32 oz. of gold per
year. So much for the myths that the “depression” was a
depression and that we are making economic progress.)
Here is the key to figuring out your economic
situation. If you save (toward retirement) 4.8 oz. of gold per year
for 50 years, then you have saved 240 oz. Whether you call this 240 oz. or
$264,000 (2009) dollars, it is not enough on which to retire. If you could
manage to find a bank or savings institution which would pay you 5%
interest, this would give you an annual income of $13,200 (2009) dollars,
about one-third of what the average American makes per year.
This underlines a key point recognized by Noah Webster and
the Founding Fathers in the 1780s. Saving alone cannot provide you with
enough money on which to retire. What Webster realized is that what
you also need is to make your capital earn interest. In 1785-86, he toured
the U.S. and legalized interest (in the northern states). Average
interest rates in the U.S. from 1788 to 1933 were 5% per year.
Eighth grade students are taught that, if you invest $100
at 5%, then after 1 year you have $105. Leave it in the bank for a second
year, and you do not have $110; instead you have $110.25. (1.05 x
1.05 = 1.1025) Leave it in for 4 years and you have $121.55. That is,
your money does not grow at a steady rate. It grows at a faster and faster
rate. This so impressed the people of the 19th century that it was called
“the miracle of compound interest.”
The savings of this first year’s salary will earn
interest for 50 years. The second year will earn interest for 49 years,
etc., and the 49th year will earn interest for 1 year. In effect, you can
pair off your yearly savings into 25 two-year bundles, each of which earns
interest for (on average) 25 years. So you have 9.6 oz. times (1.05) and
then multiplied by 1.05 49 more times. This gives you 1632 oz. of gold or,
in today’s paper dollars, $1,795,200. If you could save this
much money, then your annual income (at 5%) would be $90,000, about
2½ times the average person’s salary.
This is the key. TO RETIRE, YOU MUST INVEST AT INTEREST.
THE “”MIRACLE” OF COMPOUND INTEREST MAKES RETIREMENT
POSSIBLE. Before Noah Webster legalized interest in the (northern)
U.S. and Jeremy Bentham did the same thing in Britain, there was no
retirement. Everyone worked until they died.
It was the legalization of interest in late 18th century
Britain and America which caused these two countries to explode with
economic progress. The American North opened up a huge gap with the South
because the North legalized interest, and the South (prior to the Civil
War) refused.
The great disaster of the American New Deal was to abolish
interest. F.D.R. was not a traitor to his class. He was a representative of
the bankers, Wall Street and the big corporations. He robbed from the
common man to give to the rich.. The New Deal retained nominal interest,
but abolished real interest. If you receive 5% (money) interest in a year
in which prices are rising by 5%, then in real terms you have made zero
interest. All you have to do is to calculate real interest rates since
1933. From 1933 to 2009, real interest rates in the U.S. have averaged
zero.
But if the real interest rate is 0, then retirement is
impossible. That is the source of the problem. You write that you have
limited funds saved. But that is true of 99% of all Americans. You are
worried because you are closer to seeing reality as it is than most
people.
This system of robbing our interest is dealing a death blow
to our economy. The New Deal claimed to have made retirement possible by
starting Social Security. But American retirement existed for 145 years
before Social Security began. The past 2 generations have gradually
dissipated the nation’s store of capital.
Alright, this is the world in which we live. People
lived in this kind of world for thousands of years. It’s not good,
but it is possible to live in such a world. But actually the New Deal made
two big mistakes in setting up their system: the stock market and the real
estate market.
In the traditional American system of retirement, the
average person took his money to the savings bank and received 5% real
interest. This depended on a stable currency, which existed from the time
that the Constitution was written to 1933. This system no longer
works. However, there are two ways that we can still receive real
“interest” (or a real yield). Stocks, of course, yield a return
based on their earnings. The Government cannot steal this return by
depreciating the currency because the depreciation of the currency causes
stock prices to rise (faster than they otherwise would). You get your
“interest” (called yield), and your capital is protected. A
similar thing happens with regard to real estate. However, real estate
is not very liquid. If you have a crisis and need to raise cash, real
estate can take 6 months to sell while some shares of stock can be sold in
6 minutes.
So far the establishment is correct. It tells you to always
be in stocks. But what they do not understand is the commodity
pendulum. Starting in 1963 giant swings started in the American
economy. From 1963-1971, commodities were down in real terms. From
1971-1980, commodities were up. From 1980-99, they were down again, and
from 1999 to the present commodities have been up. When commodities are up,
it feeds through into consumer prices. These rise, forcing the Fed to
tighten, and this makes bonds and stocks go down. Looking back we can see
this effect in the 1970s, and it is starting to unfold at the present
time.
In the last cycle, stocks peaked (in real terms) in 1966,
hit a low in 1982, recovered and (in my opinion) peaked in 2007. That is a
41 year cycle. It was not something that the average person could play.
From 1966 to 1982, the stock market fell 70% in real terms. Pretty it was
not. And then in 1982, the very establishment which had told its followers
to buy and hold “good, sound stocks” for the long pull started
to tell them to sell stocks and run for the hills. So what happened to the
typical establishment follower? He lost 70% and then he sold out at
the bottom. And by not being in gold through the 1970s, he missed out on an
opportunity to multiply his money by 25% in nominal terms and by 12% in
real terms.
I can tell you what the establishment will do on this cycle
of the commodity pendulum. They will scream at their followers not to sell
stocks as stocks go down in real terms. They will keep people in the
market to the bitter end, and then they will scare them out of stocks right
at the bottom.
My approach is different. I advise being in commodities
(mostly gold) during the upswing of the commodity pendulum and being in
stocks (or real estate) during the downswing of the commodity pendulum. I
was a gold bug from 1970 to 1980, and I was a stock bug from 1982 to
2007.
Thus, if you do not listen to the establishment, you can
escape them by playing the commodity pendulum. Right now I believe that the
upswing in commodities started with a double bottom (in the CRB) in 1999
and 2001 and that it will end about 2020 (although catching the exact top
will be difficult and will have to wait on signals given at the
time). For example, the wild year in gold in 1979 was a signal of the
coming top in early 1980. You should also plan for a business
enterprise to bring in income in a tough period as employment for older
people is very difficult because of the high health insurance costs imposed
on employers.
For most people, the only solution is to restore the gold
standard. I can play the commodity pendulum, and I can teach a few
economically sophisticated people to follow me. But the real solution, for
America and the world, is to follow the lead taken by Ron Paul and restore
the gold standard. It worked for a century and a half. Now that we have
given it up we are getting poor again.
The idea that the dollar will become worthless in not
realistic for the foreseeable future: worth less, perhaps, worthless
no. The complete collapse of a currency has only happened 5 times over
the past century Germany and Austria in 1923, Hungry in 1944, Yugoslav in
1994 and Zimbabwe in 2008. The paper aristocracy of a country always wants
a little more paper money but not too much. In the U.S. in 1967-68, the Fed
went too far in easing credit and printing money with the result that a new
class of speculators (the New Breed) arose who used extreme leverage to
challenge the old establishment. This latter then were able to get the Fed
to tighten credit, and this caused the New Breed to collapse into
bankruptcy.
I hope the above is useful information for many
people. I publish a fortnightly newsletter, The One-handed
Economist ($300). You can subscribe via my web site, www.thegoldspeculator.com or
send $300 to The One-handed Economist, 614 Nashua St. #122
Milford, N.H. 03055. You may also enjoy reading my blog at www.thegoldspeculator.blo
gspot.com. This week’s blog is “Attempted
Murder” about the recent attempt of the medical establishment to
murder anti-cancer activist Suzanne Somers.
Howard S. Katz
****
My name is Howard S. Katz, and I have a
different perspective on most economic issues from anyone else you will
read. I publish a fortnightly newsletter on the markets called the
One-handed Economist ($300 per year). I was a gold bug from 1965
to 1980. Then I was a stock bug from 1982 to 2007. Now I am a gold bug
again. I look at the big picture and have one of the best records of any
economist in the country. If you are interested in subscribing to my
newsletter, then please visit, www.thegoldspeculator.com.
You might also be interested in my blog at www.thegoldspeculator.blo
gspot.com. This week’s blog is an analysis of global warming
and also examines the philosophical issue known as Pascal’s
wager.