Overnight

Oil is the story that despite its ups and downs doesn't seem to go away. At least that 's the view of some, according to recent reports about OPEC members holding meeting next month where production cuts might be the main topic.

Such talk reportedly hiked U.S. oil prices nearly 3% overnight putting U.S. oil a $43.02 a barrel and coupled with what many are viewing at good news about China's consumer prices in July from a year earlier at 1.8%, the third straight month it's  shown weakness, will add pressure to the Bank of China to further ease monetary policy. The  1.8%is well below the 3%  government target.

The Nikkei 225 edged higher 0.11%, the Australian ASX 200 was flat, the Hang Seng Index dropped 0.38%, the Shanghai Composite remained flat and the Shenzhen Composite moved up slightly 0.28% In general it was a modest day trading as some investors wait to see what India's central bank will do with its monetary policy also.


In the currency market, the dollar remained relatively flat against a basket of currencies, trading at 96.467, compared with its last close at 96.401. The dollar index climbed from levels under 96.00 in the previous week.The Japanese yen remained weaker against the greenback, trading at 102.38 as of 10:48 a.m. HK/SIN, compared with levels below 101.5 last Wednesday, Reuters noted.

Getting back the to oil story, however, some feel $26 a barrel seen in Fedcruary won't be seen again for sometime. One reason is spending cuts by the big boys should impact production next year and OPEC's margin for increasing output grow slimmer.So another upturn in the price of oil might be in the wings.

Credibilty On The Line

 
Be careful what you wish for is an old saying. It's another way of pointing out that getting what you expect might be exactly the opposite what you really want.

Negative and zero interest rates were supposed to cause people to borrow and spend more. At least that 's what central bankers believed when they cut rates in many countries around the globe. Well. guess what, it isn't happening according to this article in the Wall Street Journal.

Two years ago, the European Central Bank cut interest rates below zero to encourage people such as Heike Hofmann, who sells fruits and vegetables in this small city, to spend more.

Policy makers in Europe and Japan have turned to negative rates for the same reason—to stimulate their lackluster economies. Yet the results have left some economists scratching their heads. Instead of opening their wallets, many consumers and businesses are squirreling away more money.

When Ms. Hofmann heard the ECB was knocking rates below zero in June 2014, she considered it “madness” and promptly cut her spending, set aside more money and bought gold. “I now need to save more than before to have enough to retire,” says Ms. Hofmann, 54 years old.

Recent economic data show consumers are saving more in Germany and Japan, and in Denmark, Switzerland and Sweden, three non-eurozone countries with negative rates, savings are at their highest since 1995, the year the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development started collecting data on those countries. Companies in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Japan also are holding on to more cash.

Economists point to a variety of other possible factors confounding central-bank policy: Low inflation has left consumers with more money to sock away; aging populations are naturally more inclined to save; central banks themselves may have failed to properly explain their actions.

But there is a growing suspicion that part of problem may be negative rates themselves. Some economists and bankers contend that negative rates communicate fear over the growth outlook and the central bank’s ability to manage it. 

“People only borrow and spend more when they are confident about the future,” says Andrew Sheets, chief cross-asset strategist at Morgan Stanley. “But by going negative, into uncharted territory, the policy actually undermines confidence.”

As the percentage of negative rate debt out there grows there's growing suspicion it isn't working and that could be the final blow to any central bank credibility these people might have left. 

wsj.com/articles/are-negative-rates-backfiring-heres-some-early-evidence

Overnight

Blamed it on the strong U.S. jobs report. That's what gurus are saying abut the overnight rally in Japanese socks. The Nikkei was up 2.1 percent at 16,592.05 points, after touching a 1-week high of 16,612.13. The broader Topix climbed 1.6 percent to 1,299.93 and the JPX-Nikkei Index 400 rose 1.6 percent to 11,699.42. Chinese markets traded slightly lower, with the Shanghai composite down 0.07 percent and the Shenzhen composite off by 0.23 percent

 The Korean Kospi rallied 0.2%, the Australian ASX 200 was up 0.8% and the Hong Kong Hang Seng gained 1.1% The WSJ reported: Nonfarm payrolls in the U.S. rose by a seasonally adjusted 255,000 in July, the U.S. Department of Labor said Friday. An economists’ survey by The Wall Street Journal had expected employers would add 179,000 jobs. Analysts say the data signal that the U.S. economy, while stable, isn’t strong enough to signal higher interest rates. The upbeat U.S. data led to the dollar trading higher against the yen, lifting the shares of major financial firms and exporters in Japan. A weaker yen helps Japanese exporters.

Despite what many think gold might losing its stepchild status as more prominent investors seem to be touting the yellow metal. Gold was also higher on Monday, after spot gold retreated on Friday by nearly 2 percent on the back of the strong U.S. jobs report. As of 10:35 a.m. HK/SIN, spot gold traded up 0.13 percent at $1,336.86. The precious metal had been trading at levels near a two-year high, with several prominent investors, including Bill Gross, favoring the commodity.

Inflation Comparisons

Self-explanatory chart from davidstockmanscontracorner.com/chart-of-the-day-the-mother-of-all-inflations-college-tuition-fees-since-1978.

The Stop At Nothing Crowd

You come up on articles like this below and you just shake your head. It says the author, Jennifer Johns is a senior lecturer at the University of Liverpool. We don't know what junior lecturers are about, Ms Johns piece is riddled with soppy, sappy globalization stuff like: But while the desire for sovereignty and to “take back control” were top of many voters' list of reasons to vote to leave, the fact that we live in a globalised world where economies and trade supersede national boundaries cannot be ignored.

businessinsider.com/a-glaring-uncertainty-remains-in-the-uk-after-brexit-2016-8?

It can be ignored. Why not? The fact that two or three nations can't trade without a distant, indifferent, controlling overlord is just plain pablum. Of course they can. And they can do a better job and have more control. Then there is this absence of a plan nonsense. We all know what happen to the best of plans men and rodents. Plans are made to be changed and often meant to be changed. Did we know a hundred years ago what today's world would look like and how,say, China's relationship with the outside world would look like. We rather doubt it. One thing is certain; it will evolve, good or bad. Most things are not knowable in advance, the worst nightmare of narrow minded, seeking-to-control-everything so-called experts.

There remains great uncertainty in the aftermath of the UK vote to leave the European Union.

Few seem to have a plan for what Brexit will look like and how the UK’s relationship with the outside world will take shape.

But while the desire for sovereignty and to “take back control” were top of many voters' list of reasons to vote to leave, the fact that we live in a globalised world where economies and trade supersede national boundaries cannot be ignored.

Much of the confusion about how Brexit will affect the British economy has resulted from the inability of those for and against it to acknowledge the realities of the position of the UK in the contemporary global economy.

This failure to understand the realities of globalisation is partly why there is such confusion about how to deliver the kind of post-Brexit UK demanded by those who voted leave. But regaining national sovereignty is extremely difficult, if not impossible, in today’s global economy.

Who's realities, this person's or some  cellar-dwelling academic?  Regaining national sovereignty won't be difficult. And it certainly isn't impossible. Change is part of life and the once welcome change of globalization is now not so welcome. It has proved its worth and it worth proved much less than it promises. This is an ages-old formula for change, a primary reason for change in any relationship. Economies and trade only supersede national boundaries because the people in those national boundaries once gave their consent. The vote of the people rolled back that consent.

The author then begins to repeat herself. The interconnectedness, the degree because it's reached "unprecedented level' can't be changed.  That's an interesting straw man. Why don't we take that attitude toward other issues that have reached unprecedented levels, like type 2 diabetes or obesity or sovereign indebtedness, or government wastefulness, to name just a few of many.

The interconnected world

The recent global financial crisis should have sent a powerful message. The degree of interconnection between places in the global economy has reached unprecedented levels and attempts to “unpick” these interconnections are highly problematic.

That this trade flows trough the cities where there were more stay than leave voters supposedly weakens the author's point not strengthens it. The people in these cities--though hardly not all of them--we're benefiting from the trade. Those on the periphery weren't, notwithstanding all the phony babble about lower prices.

Globalisation is complex. It is no longer a case of “us” and “them”. Capital, goods and services flow within, between and across national borders – and the flow is uneven. It is often directed through key cities. So when we talk about flows of foreign direct investment between the UK and Germany, we are actually discussing flows of people and money between cities such as London and Berlin.

In fact, cities are the key drivers in trade. It is no surprise therefore that there were significantly higher votes to remain in the EU in cities such as London and Manchester. This is because these cities are points in the global economy through which trade, services and people flow. It is in these locations that we can most easily see the benefits of interconnection with cities in the EU and beyond.

Outside of the major cities, the regions of the UK have experienced a downward shift in the scale at which economic activity takes place and political power is exercised. The national shift from manufacturing to a service-based economy has had a geographically uneven impact.

Many manufacturing industries in the UK’s regions have shrunk or disappeared. This has not been helped by UK national policy which focuses on the financial services sector (predominately in London).

Globalisation’s disconnect

Globalisation has brought with it disconnection between the way that economies and their management have been simultaneously downscaled and upscaled. So, as well as the concentration of decision making in Westminster, there are also a number of decisions being made abroad that affect regions across the UK – the evolution of the European Union epitomises this process.

This upscaling of power is necessary. Many of the most important issues of the last three decades are shared across national boundaries – take for example environmental concerns.

We would hardly call this an upscaling of power, sending it off to a bunch  of hapless bureaucrats in Brussels. That has an elitist edge t it it tht is precisely why many voted to get out of the EU.

The formation of supra-regions begins with an acknowledgement of the benefits of removing trade barriers and having free movement of goods and services, which should create opportunities for all regions of the UK.

In fact, the best hope for deprived areas of the UK is not to place decision making squarely back in the hands of the UK government. This gives power back to the very institutions that created and exacerbated the regional inequalities seen in the UK today.

Benefits such as investment in local enterprises and infrastructure, improvements in working conditions and levels of employment result from international engagement and cooperation.

Her above point is even more ridiculous. Notice her choice of the hedge about these supra-
regional packs "should create opportunists for al regions of the UK." It's telling that she wants the vote-to-leave crowd have clear and specific ideas where the movement in going and will be years hence, but she gets to hedge on the benefits to all areas of the UK with her supra-regional gizmos. 

Those who – justifiably – feel isolated and economically depressed should call for greater decision-making power at a more local level.

The above statement completely misses the point of the leave vote. The left out and isolated vote was a call for more local control. We don't what election this lady was watching. Another hedge and condescending remark, those "justifiably" feeling isolated, we bet we know who gets to define that term.

Local power, combined with access to international resources and opportunities, can start rebuilding local economies. Globalisation makes this possible as cities and regions do not necessarily need to go via London for trade and investment. These connections are essential for local economies to compete in the globalised world.

But leaving the EU means leaving the hundreds of trade agreements the UK has with non-EU countries and also possibly the freedom of movement of goods and services there is within the EU. Until these are rearranged (which will take several decades), the UK’s constituent regions may struggle to access international markets. So the “take back control” rhetoric offers no solutions, only problems.

The idea that any new agreements will take decades to strike new agreements is based on  past performance. Past is not necessarily prologue. it just suits the scaremongers' purposes. Can't stop this movement through the front door, we'll sneak it through the back one.

The UK government has consistently failed to articulate the rationale and benefits of upscaling in its relations globally (specifically in the form of EU membership), despite the economic benefits it has brought. It is not about the removal of national boundaries but rather an acceptance of how so much of what drives the global economy occurs outside of these strict boundaries.

The above is really a twisted point of view. What benefits? It is precisely about removing government boundaries and sovereign currencies and the like. It's also about removing personal liberties and freedom of choices. Self-determination.

Closer economic cooperation is the only logical response to globalisation and the best way to ensure stable growth. Indeed, the short, medium and long-term impacts of the Brexit vote will surely serve to provide the UK with a harsh lesson in the dangers of going it alone.

We can't recall anyone saying the UK intended to go it alone. More scaremongering. Never be surprised at the people  who will stop at nothing to get what they want when they stop at nothing.

Jennifer Johns, Senior Lecturer in International Business and Economic Geography, University of Liverpool

Might Want To Take Note

It sounds like a movie or novel title, The Shock of Brexit. It could be, but it isn't.

It's an overreaction to something that needed to and should've happened and is likely to continue to happen as people learn that pitfalls of globalization and absentee landlord  rule. This won't stop the scaremongers of the world like Goldman Sachs or the antsy-panttsy horde of central bankers who mistakenly think they can magically price market rates with their profligate monetary policies.

As if things weren't already out of  control with global ZIRP and NIRP, central bankers hardly ever fail to disappoint and in the process reveal they're incompetence. The Bank of England earlier this week issued another chapter in what could be called their let-it-all-hang-out monetary policy.

After waiting a while to see what would happen, we're now starting to find out. The UK pound been getting hammered and domestic prices are on the rise to offset some of the cost of imports consumers are being hit with. Importers and foreign companies find themselves in a bind.

The WSJ reports: Be prepared for another interest-rate cut before the end of the year.That’s the message from Ben Broadbent, Bank of England deputy governor for monetary policy, who said the Brexit vote has likely hurt the economy’s capacity to produce goods and services. While Broadbent said he’s minded to vote for another rate cut this year, he cautioned that central-bank stimulus and easier tax-and-spending policy can only do so much to support the economy.

Markets had priced in easing, but not such a big-bang approach,writes Richard Barley in his Heard on the Street column. Unlike other central banks, the BOE on Thursday overwhelmed markets by pulling every stimulus lever available to counteract the shock of Brexit—and making clear they could yet be pulled harder. But this effort, while prudent for now, is further exposing the risks of aggressive monetary policy.

In the U.S. one big insurance company just announced a big cutback owing to losses from the artificially-butchered interest rates. Banks aren't happy. Retirement and pension  firms will further  have to retrench or take on more risk for less or zero return. 

With growth slowing and prices rising it's a decent chance for stagflation to show up. It's also the longer it goes on threatens any underlying faith people may have left In the fiat money system these central banker are struggling so hard to preserve. Fiat money is their lamented credential to the printing press room.

Let it all hang out policies smack of desperation not quiet confidence. As an investor you might want to take note. 

High Prices

Over the years several magicians worked their version of the levitation trick. A few more modern day ones reside at the Eccles Building in Washington.

But as everyone deep down knows it's a trick, a mirage of sorts that's designed to capture and fascinate the audience, suspend their disbelief for a brief period. Those magicians over in the Eccles Building have been suspending their current levitation version for quite a while now, going on a near decade.

So that brings up what is and has been an important question for quite a while, too. When does it all end? The real answer, the truthful one--imagine that, using a term like truthful when it comes to the Street--is your guess is about as good as your next door neighbor. That is, unless he or she is an economist. In that case, yours is most likely a couple of times to the third power better.

The most likely best answer has nothing to do with economic voodoo data and econometric models hatched in academic cellars but more likely zen. That's correct, zen. How long does it take? However long it takes. It will end when it ends. And it will take market historians years to figure out what actually triggered the end.

No doubt economists will waste reams of climate-change recycled paper rolling out articles mostly written for themselves to let us all know what happen and why. That's what functionaries, otherwise known as experts, do, waste our time and bore us to tears. We had a friend who was trapped in a relationship that he told me one day over lunch was so boring he was actually spending 7.567 hours a day crying. And that was minus any regression to the mean. I had never met his wife. And when I asked if he was married to an economist, he started sobbing uncontrollably: "How'd you know? Harvard!"

He kept sobbing. No matter what I said. It was getting embarrassing. The place was high noon full and the people at all the other tables were staring at us. The manager finally came over, called me aside and demanded that I leave.

"Me? What did I do?"

He gently placed his hand on my shoulder and nudged me in the direction of a sign on the wall above the counter. "We don't tolerate the e-word in this establishment. You will be asked to leave immediately."

A physician friend of ours many years ago told me this story. When he was a resident at a large, cold indifferent big county teaching hospital, he was assigned an old gentleman in his late 80s. His body was frail but his mind was laser-beam sharp. He spent his entire career trading commodities, starting out as a young man trading cotton in Memphis. The old guy was terminal and they both knew it.

My friend the physician said the hospital was so crowded they had to move the old guy's bed into a spare closet were there was only room for a rickety metal nightstand and one chair. A withered, yellowing birthday card from a niece somewhere back east sat on the nightstand. The date inside the card, one of the old guy's few possessions, was 10 years old. He proudly showed the card to anyone and everyone who showed any interest.

For most that passed in and out of his room he was understandably just an old guy really late on the back nine of his life. To my friend he was a treasure trove of information, in some light worthy of the status of a national monument, the way he could pull long forgotten streams of commodity prices out of his head, each with its own fascinating story. 

Now my friend the physician had a secret, secondary interest, a burning one to learn all he could about commodities and hoped one day to trade them. So when he found out about the old guy's past, he struck up a friendship and would take time out each day to sit and visit. One day he asked the old gentleman what commodities he traded.

"Everything from cattle to cotton to soybeans to wives," the old guy chuckled. "I made millions, lost them, made the back again and lost them. It was a quite a ride."

As the end approached and they both knew it was, though he said they never discussed it, my friend spent more time at his bedside exchanging quips and such, telling stories.

"Is there one thing you learned over all those years," my friend asked?

After a brief pause, he said the old guy fastened those clear cobalt blue eyes on him and smilingly said: "Here's something you might want to remember. It's a point those politicians, regulators and bureaucrats never get and probably never will. The cure for high prices sooner or later is high prices."

And that's when this charade will end. Someone will decide that prices are too high. The butterfly will flap it wings, the tsunami will start...... and it won't matter one damn big econometric model or another what anyone says.

Overnight

A down day on Wall Street set the tome for Asia overnight as the Nikkei 225 hit a three-week low Wednesday with the index-off 0.9% at 16,249.97 as investors showed their apparent disappointment in Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's latest attempt to stimulate the Japanese economy.The Topix was down 1.3%, the Kospi dropped 1%  and after the Reserve Bank of Australia cut it s cash rate 25 basis point to 1.50%, the ASX 200 fell 0.8%.  The dollar was up 0.4 percent on the day at 101.25 yen , but as it stayed near a 3-week trough of 100.680 hit overnight. The yen's recent strength impacts Japan's exporters.The Hang Send was down 1.6%.

Meanwhile, oil prices traded higher with U.S. crude up 0.68 percent to $39.78. Global benchmark Brent futures traded up 0.55 percent at $42.03.he Wall Street Jurnal reported that China’s service sector expanded at a slower pace in July, data from Caixin Media Co. and research firm Markit showed. The Caixin China services purchasing managers index slipped to 51.7 in July from 52.7 in June.  The fall came after an 11-month high reading in June, pointing to renewed softness in the nation’s service sector, despite the government’s efforts to bolster economic growth.

Overnight

Oil prices have been in a swoon of late falling below $40 a barrel and Monday on Wall Street the trend continued affecting some say overnight trading in Asia Tuesday as shares there fell in early trading.

Tuesday is an important day also for another Asian central bank, the Reserve Bank of Australia, as it's policy board decides whether to cut rates or leave them where they are at 1.75 percent in an effort to head off low inflation and a rising currency. Last week investor eyes were focuses on the Fed and the Bank of Japan. Economists are not so good at predicting much of anything and interest rate cuts  or hikes are no exception. The majority are calling for a quarter percent, 25 basis point, cut when the meeting concludes. But recent upturns in things like manufacturing, business confidence and jobs might put a hold on such. Australian shares were off a fraction I nearly trading.

The Nikkei 225 dropped 0.8% as the yen strengthened against the dollar. The MSCI, the broadest index of Asian-Pacific shares  excluding Japan, edged lower 0.2% while Hong Kong  was shut down in light of Typhoon Nida threatening to come ashore. The Kospi was down 0.4%, the Shanghai composite was up 0.1%

In Japan, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's cabinet is likely to approve a 28 trillion yen ($273 billion) stimulus package on Tuesday, though direct fiscal spending will total only about 7 trillion yen, according to two people briefed on the matter, according to Reuters.

Meanwhile, a warning from Japan's head bank regulator in the WSJ.

TOKYO—Japan had its financial crisis long before the West. A quarter-century of stagnation later, the country’s top bank regulator has a warning for his global counterparts: Overreacting to the bust could undermine the recovery.

“Supervisors’ emphasis on clean bank balance sheets...may have had side effects,” Nobuchika Mori said when asked in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal what lessons he would offer from his country’s experience cleaning up a burst bubble.

“Looking back from today’s vantage point, we wonder if we should have done things differently, paying more attention to economic growth,” he said.

It is a contrast with the tone in Washington, where bank overseers continue to add capital requirements and other restrictions. The Federal Reserve and other regulators have defended the steps as necessary to keep the banking system safe. But critics in the industry say they are in some cases deterring banks from taking the risks and offering the credit needed to fuel faster economic activity.
 

Mr. Mori spent most of his career at Japan’s powerful Ministry of Finance, working in various divisions from international finance to national budget, before moving next door to the Financial Services Agency in 2006.

He became commissioner of the agency a year ago, making him the country’s top financial regulator. His one-stop-shop agency combines the functions of a broad range of American overseers, from the market monitoring of the Securities and Exchange Commission to the bank supervision of the Fed and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

Crude oil bounced back 0.6% to $42.60 a barrel. Gold remained slightly changed Tuesday, still near its three-week high made last Friday at $1,355.10 ;partly on the growing expectations U.S. interest rate hikes have been tabled  for now. U.S. gold was flat at $1,359.8 an ounce.

They Know No Bounds

 
This is great stuff. We've been writing about people like this for some time now. This is exactly what will bring these people down, their inherent arrogance, conceit and contempt for anybody who dare differ with their view. It's pure Ivy League endemic.

Now we've been onto this dude for awhile, but we want to thank you, Professor, for coming out of the closet at this time. Moreover, for scrolling the line of separation deeper and clearer in the sand. You're a good man, sir.

This is what these people as we've said before whether you're brown, yellow, black, white or rainbow-colored think of you. It does not matter your occupation or profession, this is how the elites see you. Not just you but your offspring or anyone even faintly like you. Thank you, sir. No more sub rosa. This gets it out in the open. A very, very healthy kind of party. Daylight. You're a tribute to your kind and breed, sir. Maybe some day they'll make the face of one of their noble coins in your likeness.

Shocked by the inexplicable realization that Americans are stubbornly unwilling to bow down and blindly accept the political and economic views of the educated elites in this country, Harvard Professor Gregory Mankiw recently took to the New York Times to pen an op-ed where he concluded that the only possible reason for the lack of conformity to his point of view is the stupidity and racism of the electorate.  An article by Adam Button at forexlive, called our attention to the recent op-ed which he described as a "dazzling display of contempt for the public from a Harvard professor who can't believe that voters aren't listening to the gospel of the economic elites."

Questioning why American's object to increasing globalization, Professor Mankiw pointed to three main conclusions:

"The first is isolationism more broadly. Trade skeptics tend to think, for example, that the United States should stay out of world affairs and avoid getting involved in foreign conflicts. They are not eager for the United States to work with other nations to solve global problems like hunger and pollution."

"The second is nationalism. Trade skeptics tend to think that the United States is culturally superior to other nations. They say the world would be better if people elsewhere were more like Americans."

"The third is ethnocentrism. Trade skeptics tend to divide the world into racial and ethnic groups and think that the one they belong to is better than the others. They say their own group is harder working, less wasteful and more trustworthy."

The good professor seems to have missed a vital point. The only people trying to export American culture are the neocons, sticking their noses into places they hardly belong, propping up vile dictators for clandestine, hegemonic reasons, secretly signing trade pacts that benefit the few and harm the many.

 Assassinating people they differ with, using drones to kill innocent children they never knew. Those are high watermarks of a civilized tribe, sir. But his third point, ethnocentrism, is perhaps his most cute, claiming trade skeptics divide the globe into racial and ethnic groups, thinking their group is better than all the others. It's seems the good professor has his own kind of division, one he appears to be quite proficient at.

Hunger and pollution. If such came from the mouth of a rightist rather than a leftist, and we're neither, it would sound the tocsin of apple pie and motherhood. Elitists like zealots know no boundaries. Professor Mankiw appears to be a card carrying member of both. And we say: good for you, sir. Good for you.

zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-31/apparently-if-you-disagree-harvard-economist-then-youre-stupid-and-racist