by Tyler Durden

And so the double dip confirmation resumes, with the Richmond Fed printing at -10, the lowest since June 2009, well below consensus of -5, a collapse from June’s -1, and the lowest since June 2009. From the report: “In August, the seasonally adjusted composite index of manufacturing activity — our broadest measure of manufacturing — declined nine points to ?10 from July’s reading of ?1. Among the index’s components, shipments lost sixteen points to ?17, and new orders dropped six points to finish at ?11, while the jobs index inched down three points to 1.” And more: “Other indicators also suggested additional softening. The index for capacity utilization declined eight points to ?14 and the backlogs of orders fell seven points to end at ?25. Additionally, the delivery times index moved down twelve points to end at ?4, while our gauges for inventories were virtually unchanged in August. The finished goods inventory index held steady at 17 in August, while the raw materials inventories index added one point to finish at 19.” And the final nail in the economic coffin was New Home Sales which came at 298K, down from 312K upward revised prior, and missing the consensus of 310k: the lowest in 5 months. “Housing data over the past three months indicates that there is little appetite in the consumer sector to take on the risk of purchasing a home at a time when prices are likely to decline further,’’ says Bloomberg economist Joseph Brusuelas. As Bank Of America (RIP) said yesterday, one false word out of Beranke on Friday, and we will see what could possibly be the most epic market crash ever. For those wondering why stocks surged on this horrible news: look no further than the central planners in the Marriner Eccles building who are now expected to do “the right thing” for stocks.

Richmond Fed:

By Jordan Roy-Byrne, CMT

In our most recent commentary we wrote about the relative strength in the gold equities. Gold equities have not only bucked the downtrend in the equity markets but in relative terms are breaking to new highs against equity indices. In the chart below we plot precious metals prices, GDX versus the Morgan Stanley World Index and GDX versus the S&P 500. We highlight how each performed during bear markets. Other than in the crash in 2008, precious metals and the equities have performed quite well during times of struggle for conventional stocks.

For a historical perspective on the gold stocks relative to the stock market, one should consider this chart from Nick Laird of Sharelynx.com. This picture shows the ratio of the Barrons Gold Mining index versus the S&P 500. Although a year old, the current ratio is fairly close to where it was in 2010.

It is important to note that the strong outperformance of gold stocks usually begins later in the bull market. During the 1923 to 1937 bull market, gold stock relative performance surged from 1930 to 1935. In the 1960 to 1981 bull market, gold stock relative performance didn’t begin in earnest until 1973. We are 11 years into the current bull market and the BGMI/S&P ratio has yet to surge though it has increased gradually.

History tells us two things. First, it shows that when Gold is in a bull market, the gold equities will outperform the stock market if its in a bear market. That was the case from 2007-2009, 2000-2002, 1977-1980 and from 1929-1932. Second, it shows that the biggest gains for gold stocks in both nominal and real terms come in the second half of the bull market.

Precious metals and the related equities cannot have a strong bull market lasting several years if conventional stocks are rising. If conventional investments are rising then the mainstream and retail investor won’t put one cent into Gold. After all, if conventional assets are healthy then why do you need Gold? Gold flourishes in an environment where stocks and bonds are questioned. The gold stocks do best in such an environment, provided the equity market is not crashing.

We have already had two 50% declines in the last ten years. We are following the typical pattern of a secular bear market. The pattern calls for a cyclical bear market over the next few years. The private sector has already had to deal with two recessions in ten years. It is prepared for this environment. This cyclical bear will be a government-led recession in which high inflation and rising interest rates hurt growth. Meanwhile, households are still in a delevarging process that will last another five years at least. It is a muddle through environment.

For gold stock investors, this is nothing to fear. This is exactly the environment we need for gold and silver stocks to flourish. Their relative strength amid the equity carnage is a positive omen. They are starting to act as called for by the aforementioned history. However, we do understand why some investors are concerned. Equities are selling off and with 2008 in the rear-view mirror this can be even scary for Gold.

Why Thousands of TRADERS are using my Trading Signals for ETF’s, Stocks and Commodities

The rebound from the recent recession is the slowest economic comeback in living memory – so slow that some doubt whether it is happening at all. The recession bottomed (the economy stopped shrinking) in June 2009, so the recovery is now two years old. Here’s how things looked 24 months into recovery from the last four recessions.

The sleepwalking during the last 24 months is all the more remarkable, given that the economy has been treated with the biggest dose of monetary and fiscal stimulants ever administered in U.S. history. Why the continued weak pulse?

Each recession has its own story – how long it lasts, how deep it gets, industries worst hit, particular bubbles burst. But in every recession, the heart of the problem is the same, namely, an imbalance in the market for cash. Every recession begins when the aggregate amount of cash that people want to hold (given their wealth and the other things they want to own) is more than the amount of cash actually in existence. That imbalance – the demand for cash exceeding the supply – depresses the entire economy because the flip side of the market for cash is the market for everything else. All markets and all industries are hit, and most of them contract because most people are trying to sell more than they buy… which is the only way for anyone to increase his cash holdings and which is impossible for everyone to do at the same time.

In the period from the end of the Civil War to the end of World War II, most recessions began when the government, by plan or by blunder, contracted the supply of cash, so that it fell below the public’s demand for cash. Since World War II, every recession has begun when the government, again by plan or by blunder, allowed the growth in the supply of cash to lag behind the growth in the demand.

The early stages of a typical pre-WWII recession would push some commercial banks into insolvency, which would shrink the supply of cash even further, since insolvency meant that some part of the deposits held by bank customers were lost. As the recession proceeded, an increase in the demand for cash by worried investors, worried business people and worried workers would make the cash shortage even more severe.

Every recession between the Civil War and World War II ended on its own. In no case was a recession brought to an end by the actions of an alert government agency or with the advice of learned economists. Recessions were cured, automatically, by falling prices. Falling prices were the cure because they increased the real value (purchasing power) of whatever amount of cash the public was holding. Prices kept falling until the real value of the existing supply of cash grew to a level that exceeded what the public wanted to hold. Then, as individuals and businesses began to spend the excess, the economy would begin to recover.

Until the Great Depression of the 1930s, the average length of a recession was 21 months. The misery that began in October 1929 lasted five times that long – 105 months. It was the severest recession ever, with unemployment reaching one-third of the workforce, because the shortage of cash that brought it on was the severest ever: the M1 money supply (hand-to-hand currency plus checking deposits) shrank by one-third. But a different factor made it the most prolonged of recessions. Aiming at a symptom of recession rather than at the cause, the government pursued an array of policies to prevent prices from falling, which had the perverse effect of preventing the economy from recovering. The government’s would-be medicine was, in fact, poison.

Even though the government’s first active attempt to end a recession produced a disaster, it did establish a presumption that the government shouldn’t just stand by when the economy turns down. It should do something, and the duty to do something has been assigned to the Federal Reserve.

Since the end of World War II, the Federal Reserve has acted in fire department fashion to cure each recession as soon as it was identified. Relying on a fall in prices to restore prosperity wasn’t an option the Fed wanted to consider. The Fed has attached a variety of labels to its recession-fighting steps, such as “lowering interests,” “easing credit conditions” or, more recently, “quantitative easing.” But they’ve all amounted to the same thing – increasing the public’s supply of cash to a point where it exceeds the public’s demand for cash.

As of the end of June, we are 42 months from the December 2007 start of the last recession. The table below shows the total growth in the M1 money supply during that period and also during the 42 months following each of the preceding three recessions. The most recent downturn has clearly been met with the most aggressive additions to the supply of cash. The July 1990 recession comes close in that regard, but in that case the new cash produced the intended effect; the economy revived. Why is it that, this time around, the new money seems to be accomplishing so little?

The answer has at least four parts.

1. Nearly all recessions are exacerbated to some degree by an increase in the public’s demand to hold cash. Recessions produce worry and uncertainty, and cash is the most versatile provision for the unknown and hence is the best anti-anxiety drug. The collapse, in 2008 and 2009, of financial institutions that the public had taken for granted as part of an unshakeable firmament is still a fresh memory. The public wants to hold more cash now than it did going into the last recession because it is still worried. So some part of the 40% increase in M1 has been absorbed by that increase in the demand to hold money.

2. Expected real estate deflation. In the housing market, the U.S. government has repeated the 180-degree wrong-way error of the Great Depression – trying to keep prices from falling. Tax credits for first-time homebuyers, payments to lenders in exchange for rewriting existing mortgages and the inventorying of foreclosed houses by government-dependent banks have prevented house prices from reaching a market-clearing level. The expectation that prices have further to fall is a reason to hold off on buying, and the flip side of delaying a purchase is holding more cash.

3. Unsettled loan portfolios. The echo of vulnerable real estate prices is doubt about bank loan portfolios. As real estate prices decline, losses on mortgages can only increase. Will the banks need to be rescued again? If so, will a deficit-ridden government show up in time? More uncertainty means more demand to hold cash.

4. Uncertainty about tax rates and rules. Much of today’s tax rules will expire at the end of 2012. No one knows what the rules will be after that. Uncertainty about tax rules is a reason for businesses to postpone investing, and a reason to put off investing is a reason to hold cash.

We don’t know how much each of those four factors has added to the demand for money, and, as investors, we don’t need to know. The critical point is that each of the factors adds a quantity to the demand for cash, something finite. So it is a certainty that their total effect can be overcome by yet more increases in the supply of money.

And more increases in the supply of money are what we are going to get until unemployment rates come down. Don’t be distracted by speculation over whether there will be a QE3. QE is just a slogan. It’s the numbers that matter, and the numbers on the money supply will keep growing. The Federal Reserve’s fear that the economy might slip back into recession will keep the numbers growing. The Fed’s need to protect the capital markets from the effect of the Treasury’s trillion-dollar deficits will keep the numbers growing.

[The public’s demand for cash is one element of a burgeoning debt crisis in the U.S. You can learn how to protect your investments: Register for the free online event, The American Debt Crisis, that will take place September 14 at 2 p.m. EDT.]

By: John Darsie of T3Live

The market was pummeled again Thursday amid fears that the global economy is headed for another painful recession. The Nasdaq led all major indices lower, dropping 5.2%, while the Dow held up best, only down 3.8%. The Europe is the main culprit, and the continent’s sovereign debt crisis still has no end in sight. Japan also significantly lowered GDP forecasts this morning.

Investors fled equities and are moving to cash, bonds and gold, which extended to another new high today. Late last week and early this week the market was able to bounce on light volume, but the VXX created a bull flag that forecast a continuation move. Bonds also were telling a bearish story. Technicals at this stage are telling us that significantly lower prices are ahead for the market.

Courtesy of Joshua M. Brown, The Reformed Broker

The recovery is dying and the markets don’t much like to hear that.

The Dow is off 4oo points as of this posting, off the lows now that Europe has closed. The S&P and Nazz are off 4% apiece as well. We’re sitting on our hands here with lots of cash and bonds. Just as we’ve been since August 1.

I want so badly to start nibbling at the panic but every time I flip on the TV there’s another putz saying that “things are getting overdone”. That same thickie with the glasses on the floor of the NYSE I used to battle with over his ridiculous cyclical stock portfolio – “Can’t go wrong with Caterpillar and Freeport Mac!” – he’s still out there losing people money.

I keep getting asked what would get me off the sidelines. I guess I’ll know it when I see it. But the benefits of catching a snapback rally are far outweighed by the “what if” questions surrounding virtually every asset class and sovereign entity. And it all comes back to the fact that, as I’ve been discussing for weeks now, the recovery is starting to die. This morning’s economic releases were essentially a coroner’s report.

Witness:

PHILLY FED: A TOTAL DISASTER (Pragmatic Capitalism)

Home sales take a sharp turn down (CNNMoney)

Stocks sink worldwide, sending Dow down 470 points (LA Times)

And if you think we have it bad, the Dax is off 6% while the European banks as a group closed out down between 7% to 10%.

I’m sorry to pile on the gloom today, but really, what else should we be talking about at this point?

Bruce Krasting

Last evening I got the WSJ breaking news story that busted the global capital markets today. Note the time, 8:06.

Look at the immediate consequence to the EURDLR fx rate. There are big gaps down for EUR shortly after the story hit the tape in Asia. That knee jerk reaction was the same market “read” that gutted a number of Euro banks today:

I looked at the WSJ story and concluded that it was a game changer. I wrote Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge about this. The “Re:” that I used was:

TD responded:

ZH had a piece today on the WSJ story that caused all the trouble. The “plant” theme was repeated. from the ZH article:

Tyler answers his own question with:

This is very important stuff. Three critical questions:

I) Was the WSJ story a plant?
II) If so, who planted it?
III) Why in heaven’s sake would anyone (especially the Fed) want to bomb the capital markets?

IMHO opinion this was a plant. The author was Carrick Mollenkamp. This guy is a seasoned pro. This story was vetted at the highest levels at the WSJ. The editors knew full well the implication of this article. Every ‘i’ was dotted and all quotes were checked. There are no mistakes in this article.

But who were those “sources” that the WSJ hung their hat(s) on? This was one of the biggest stories of the year. Who are the readers of the WSJ supposed to rely on regarding the serious issues raised in the article? Easy. No one is the answer. These are the attributed sources for the guts of the story:

Federal and state regulators, signaling their growing worry that Europe’s debt crisis could spill into the U.S. banking system, are intensifying their scrutiny of the U.S. arms of Europe’s biggest banks, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Fed is demanding more information from the banks about whether they have reliable access to the funds needed to operate on a day-to-day basis in the U.S. and, in some cases, pushing the banks to overhaul their U.S. structures, the people familiar with the matter say.

Fed officials recently have held meetings…………. according to the people familiar with the matter.

The New York Fed has also been coordinating with New York’s superintendent of financial services, Benjamin M. Lawsky, to monitor the foreign banks’ funding positions, said people familiar with the matter.

You can come to your own conclusions on this. It is my opinion that there is no way the WSJ could have run this story without direct confirmation from the Fed. Those people who are so “familiar” with this matter are senior Fed officials.
.

That, for me, answers #s I & II above. But it begs the question, “Why”?

Is it remotely possible that the Fed deliberately engineered a collapse in markets in order to get the necessary political “cover” to initiate some new massive monetary policy as TD suggeted?

There is one possible clue in the article that points to this conclusion:

Until recently, that (Euro funding problems) hasn’t been a problem. Thanks partly to the Federal Reserve’s so-called quantitative-easing program, huge amounts of dollars have been sloshing around the financial system, and much of it has landed at international banks

This observation from Mollenkamp is from the Feds lips. The obvious conclusion from this paragraph is that to reverse the crisis now boiling over in Europe more “QE” is required.

What is QE? It can be anything that stimulates the price, velocity and availability of money. It does not have to be LSAP (traditional QE) or an extension of ZIRP. It can take other forms.

The most convenient of which is to open the Fed’s $ swap lines to the Euro banks. We may get this development by Monday morning.

My take on this is that the Fed manipulated the news. It did so very deliberately. The Fed had an agenda; they did whatever they thought necessary to gain acceptance for what they have up their sleeve.
The story was deliberately timed to undermine (further) the European banks. It worked. Now Bernanke and his cohorts have the excuse they need to act.

That’s my take on this story. We may never know the truth. I wonder if Governor Perry understands this stuff. If he did, and he got the facts on this “out there” he would have a very big cannon to shoot. If the Fed did manipulate both the press and the markets to justify its actions it would be a very big deal indeed.

.

Posted by AskChrisHeTrades

Gold hit $1805 tonight in trading, a Fibonacci Fractal figure I gave out a few weeks ago as a possible top. We are close to a near term high in Gold and Investors should be trimming back positions on this run. Back as recently as $1600 an ounce I forecasted a run to $1805 for Gold using fractal and wave analysis and behavioral patterns, now that we hit that figure it’s time to update the cycle and where we are.

Here is the Chart I did at 1599 gold on July 22nd:

I have been a Gold Bull since November 2001, having conducted seminars for public employees on investing back then and advising gold mutual funds and gold stocks very early. I have talked in the past about a 13 fibonacci year Gold Bull cycle that will end around 2014, so there are still three years left in my opinion. However, gold does have peaks and valleys and has moved in very clear Wave and Fibonacci fractal patterns for years.

Given the history of how I have forecasted Gold, I am going to share my short term and moderately long term views on where we are in the up cycle which I expect to last 13 fibonacci years to 2014. Right now it is my opinion that we are completing a MAJOR WAVE 3 up in Gold from the 2001 lows from $300 an ounce. We have had a 34 fibonacci month rally since the October 2008 lows of $681 per ounce. Every Taxi driver, CNBC guest or analyst, and 200 Radio and TV commercials a day are blaring to buy Gold. This is how intermediate tops form.

The rough wave count is below:
Wave 1- 300 to 1030
Wave 2- 1030 to 681 (October 2008 lows)
Wave 3- 618- 1805 currently, 34 Fibonacci month cycle. *Likely high is 1862-1900*
Wave 4- Due up next… a multi month consolidation

It is my opinion that at the top of a Major wave 3 in Gold, that everyone should be univerally bullish, that gold radio and TV commercials would be all over the place, and that everyone on CNBC would be talking about and recommending Gold.

Sound familiar?

So the likely conclusion to this massive parabolic blow off top of Wave 3 is nigh. Most recently I upped my estimates to as high as $1900 per ounce with $1805 already here as of tonight, which was one of my figures by the way many weeks ago. Gold should under normal circumstances top between 1862 and 1900 per ounce fairly soon should the 1805 level not hold as a high. At that level we will be dramatically overbought. We are already running 15.7% above the 20 week moving average line which historically is about as high as Gold will get before correcting hard and consolidating. A final lift to the 1862-1900 ranges should lead to a fairly good sized correction to the downside designed to kick all the late comer Taxi Cab driving buyers off the bull’s back. With that said, at $1805 I would be trimming my position and or hedging my long positions aggressively.

Watch for a Maximum Gold top at 1862 -1900 per ounce and keep in mind 1805 is being hit tonight and that is a qualifying fibonacci fractal top as well. Investors should be trimming back positions and looking to re-deploy back into Gold at better prices. We could get a huge blow off top over 1900, but it would be very very rare if it happens.

If you’d like to stay ahead of the peaks and valleys in Gold, Silver, and the SP 500 (Recently called a tradable bottom at 1101), then check out www.MarketTrendForecast.com for a 33% 48 hour coupon or sign up for the occasional but infrequent free updates.