Daily news sites

The following chart shows the annual change in the semiannual average of new one family homes sold in the West Census Region.


Click to enlarge.

What's the worst that could happen from here? Okay, sure. The growth rate is currently negative and has been falling for 18 months. That's just this winter's East Coast's polar vortex temporarily rippling back through space and time though. Any rational optimist can see that.

Further, we already knew that the East Coast's weather would carry over to existing home sales in the West. To think otherwise is just crazy talk!

In all seriousness, the housing optimists better hope we not only stay in the channel but move back above 0% soon, or speculators may someday wish that they had embraced their fistfuls of dollars instead.



Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

The Fed isn't quite sure what threshold it should be using to determine when to raise interest rates. Can't say I blame them. I therefore thought I'd offer some free (deflationary) advice.

Furniture sales and new home sales go hand in hand. Right? So simply raise rates when furniture store sales (as a percentage of disposable personal income) reach "normal" levels again. What could be easier? Transparent. Clean. Consistent.


Click to enlarge.

Let's zoom in on that recent trend in red and try to estimate how long it will take to get back to normal.


Click to enlarge.

The solution is clear. Raise rates just this side of never. Be just like Japan!

See Also:
Trend Line Disclaimer
Sarcasm Disclaimer

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

The following chart shows the annual change in the 2-year moving average of retail sales (excluding food services). I'm going for a maximum smoothing approach to remove as much noise as possible (while still seeing the underlying trend).


Click to enlarge.

Good luck blaming the slow and steady growth rate decline (since 2012) on this winter's weather.

In May of 2012, I predicted that the next recession would hit on or before October 2014. Eight months to go. I see little reason to alter my opinion. At the rate we're going, it could be close enough for government work anyway. I truly hope I am wrong. Seriously.

If I am right (might not be of course), this is going to be a nasty recession. Why? Many seem to think a recession is impossible during ZIRP and that the Fed has saved us. What a confidence shaking wake-up call that would be.

I am especially amused by the party of 1999. Had we not thrown such a spectacular one (and hoarded for the Y2K bug that was a non-event), the recession may have happened right then and there. Praise be to celebratory can-kicking.

And lastly, rising interest rate environment my @$$.

This is not investment advice. As always, just ugly charts and opinions.

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Retail Sales: Total (Excluding Food Services)

The following chart shows real GDP.


Click to enlarge.

Four exponential trend lines and their growth rates have been added.

Note that each time an exponential trend fails, it is replaced with an exponential trend of lesser quality. What doesn't kill us, doesn't make us stronger. Go figure.

The next chart shows the long-term trend of those growth rates. I'm using the midpoint of my hand-picked expansions as the x-axis.


Click to enlarge.

The most recent data point is open to serious revision. The growth rate probably won't change much, but the x-axis position may (it could move to the right on the chart). It really comes down to how long this expansion lasts.

Real yields have fallen because real GDP growth has fallen (and continues to fall). It really is just that simple. Put another way, it is becoming harder and harder to make money off of money (current lofty stock market valuations notwithstanding).

Those hoping for a return to normal better hope that the downward trend does not continue, because that's about the only normal thing going on right now.

The future's so bright I gotta werewolves.



See Also:
The Long-Term Death of Real Yields

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Real GDP

The following chart shows the US trade deficit with China divided by the price of crude oil (annualized billions of barrels).


Click to enlarge.

It shows the amount of oil China could buy if they were to use their entire trade surplus with us to do so. That's assuming the price of oil would not be driven even higher in response to increased purchases of course, which is no doubt a bad assumption.

The next chart plots the natural log so that constant exponential growth can be seen as a straight line.


Click to enlarge.

China "sent" us ever increasing amounts of stuff that we want, yet we do not seem to be returning the favor by sending them ever increasing amounts of the stuff that they want (barrels of oil). Note that I used "sent" instead of "sends." The next chart explains why. It shows the annual growth rate of imports from China.


Click to enlarge.

As seen in the chart, the nominal growth rate is just about dead now. The growth rate in the middle of the channel is roughly 0%, which oddly enough is what the Fed feels short-term interest rates should be over an "extended period."

ZIRP-a-Dee-Doo-Dah


For what it is worth, I am not even remotely bullish on China (nor have I been since starting this blog in 2007). I also don't believe that I will ever feel the need to bribe a border guard to let me on the last plane to China. You know, as a desperate attempt to protect my future standard of living and freedoms (Patriot Act notwithstanding). Sigh.

This is not investment advice.

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart #1
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart #2
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart #3

Click to enlarge.

The line in black shows real net corporate dividends.

The line in blue shows the real trade deficit (same scale).

The red line shows the exponential trend in real dividends from 1947:Q1 to 1987:Q1. Note the exponential trend failure (to the upside).

Will real dividends stay permanently elevated? Will profit margins stay permanently elevated? Can we be assured that the worst is behind us? Can we expect future growth in real dividends to match the growth we've seen since the early 1990s? I wouldn't answer a resounding yes to any of those questions. Call me skeptical, to put it mildly. Instead, I would ask the following question.


Put another way, it really helped the corporate bottom line to transition from "Made in USA" to "Made in ____." Mission accomplished. Now what? Persistently high oil prices (financial meltdowns notwithstanding)? Persistently stagnant wage growth? Persistently high unemployment? Increased rate of US (and/or global) financial meltdowns? In and out of ZIRP from here on out (if ever out)? Even more giant sucking sounds?

February 13, 2014
China auto market growth slows sharply in January



Other than corporate executives wishing to boost the value of their net worth and retire before the @#$% really hit(s) the fan, did anyone in power really think this through?

The Chinese drive more. We drive less out of necessity (as seen in annual vehicle miles traveled per capita that fell apart during the Great Recession and has yet to make any sort of recovery). That's our plan for a more prosperous America? Seriously?

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

The following chart shows the annual change in the semiannual average of the producer price index for finished goods.


Click to enlarge.

1. Heckle the Fed for achieving long-term "stable price" certainty?

2. Heckle Jeremy Siegel for warning us that the Fed would raise rates well before 2014?

3. Heckle CNBC for warning us what the taper would do to interest rates?

4. Heckle Shadowstats for misguided hyperinflation theories?

So many many targets! So little time. I may be forced to resort to Sarcastic ZIRP Technology!



File:Minuteman III MIRV path.svg (Fastfission)

This is not investment advice.

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

The following chart shows nonfarm payrolls divided by initial claims. I'm using quarterly averages to smooth things out a bit (1967:Q1 to 2013:Q4). In my opinion, the higher the ratio, the higher the potential for layoff surprises.


Click to enlarge.

The 3rd order polynomial trend channel in red uses the red data points.

The 3rd order polynomial trend in blue uses all the data points.

I would be among the last to argue that a 3rd order polynomial can accurately predict the future. It can't, especially over the long-term. That said, damn. It's an ugly chart. We all better hope there is absolutely no truth buried within it. Unfortunately, as a permabear since 2004, I do believe there is some truth buried within it (or I would not have made the chart). How much truth remains to be seen.

In any event, I would once again point out that this is not 1982. We are not at the very bottom of the long-term channel with favorable long-term tailwinds. Instead, we are at the top of the channel with winds of a potentially different nature. Sigh.

Is it really any wonder that we're still trapped in ZIRP?



This is not investment advice.

See Also:
Trend Line Disclaimer

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart