Monday’s Trading – 11/1/2010

The last time the market rallied into an Election Day ended in tears. Remember November 4, 2008? In the week before the election, the SPX rallied 150 points. It topped out on the 4th, rolled over, and made new lows:

Of course, there is a big difference this time: the economy is expanding while it was contracting sharply two years ago.

After an extensive campaign of browbeating that I began back in January, I was eventually able to shut down the “Mutual Fund Monday” propaganda on CNBC’s “Fast Money” show. However, while the mutual-fund industry is not reporting “new money in” yet, the respectable jump in the futures Sunday night could be a sign that retail investors are finally coming back into stocks. (Some research firms have already reported inflows, but I doubt that they have better data than the ICI which is only reporting a large reduction in outflows so far.) Nevertheless, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the ICI data turn positive soon, and can’t really continue to keep my boot on CNBC’s neck.

So, if the masses are coming in, are they being sucked in by the Tea Party “Miracle” just like they were by “The Messiah” back in 2008? Or is the market just continuing to advance along with earnings and the economy? After all, even a feeble expansion can produce fat profits given our “modern” sweatshop production system. Speaking of which…

In this superb Australian video, you can see the Chinese workers (mostly women) who are sacrificing their health handling the toxic chemicals that shave a few cents off of the price of your iPad. And you can also see the dictatorial face of the Chinese communist regime. Whether or not the villagers in the video have a legitimate case, those officials were trying to discover who they should persecute when they asked the journalist who told him about the village. Can you imagine the officials in your town doing that? Not if you live in a civilized nation. The arms embargo that the European Union slapped on China after Tienanmen Square still strikes me as a good idea. There ain’t nothin’ warm and fuzzy about the regime in Beijing.

In his “Stop Trading” segment on CNBC Friday afternoon, Jim Cramer raved like a lunatic about the “genius” of Corporate America and all the fantastic profits it is producing. But really, now smart do you have to be to pack up a factory, load it onto a Kansas City Southern train, ship it down to Mexico, re-assemble it, and then staff it with workers making a tenth, or less, than your previous employees? Genius schmenius.

It’s Time to Punch China in the Face

On October 16th, I recommended the punch-in-the-face strategy:

“Personally, I would just punch China directly in the face rather than spray the whole world with QE2 monetary shrapnel as the Obama Administration’s ‘dirty bomb’ strategy is doing right now.”

But Jim Rodgers disagrees. At the 2:21 mark of the video below he says:

“Any time you bash somebody in the face, they’re gunna say, wait a minute, I’ve got to protect my face, I’ve got to protect myself. So, sitting here and hitting the Chinese over the head is not going to do much good. It’s just going to make things worse. I would stay out of the way if I were the US in this case.

“Stay out of the way?” Are you kidding me? Rodgers acts like it’s none of our business. What about our quarter-trillion dollar trade deficit with China, Mr. Rodgers? Is that our business?

If you keep watching the video, you will see that Rodgers is one of those globalists who warns of the dire consequences of protectionism – but only American protectionism. When the Chinese do it, it’s just fine, and none of our business.

Note to Rodgers: China’s currency peg is a protectionist blanket that automatically raises the prices for all US exports to China. Stop apologizing for it.

In July 1994, the Clinton Administration cited China as a currency manipulator. That was only six months after Beijing adopted the peg. We have been diplomatically expressing our displeasure for 16 years. That’s why we have to punch them in the face. Rodgers would have us kowtow for another 16 years, “bow-tie” style.

We also need to punish China for their rare-earth mineral embargo, which was extremely rude behavior here in our globalist utopia. So, I have come up with a clever punishment: a naval blockade of Iran.

Now that the Democrats are poised to lose control of Congress, President Obama will have to turn to the foreign-policy arena to do “presidential stuff”. George Friedman thinks that Iran presents the best way for Obama to score political points, and Iran is a top supplier of oil to China.

So, a naval blockade of Iran would pinch China’s energy supplies, and Obama could act as if it were an unintended consequence. If the tankers bound for Japan were somehow able to sneak through the blockade, then a message would be sent to China: You may want to reconsider your commitment to living by the mercantilist sword because we have swords of our own.

I Lecture Jeremy Grantham

Last week, fund manager Jeremy Grantham’s investor-letter titled “Night of the Living Fed” made a splash in the financial media. However, I have assigned a grade of “F” to his paper.

Grantham’s argument may be summarized as follows: “The Fed blows up destructive asset bubbles because they are stupid.”

But is it that simple? One of the Fed’s mandates is to strive for “maximum employment”. But was it the Fed that “fast tracked” NAFTA through Congress? Did the Fed award “most favored nation” status to China? Did the Fed import millions of immigrants? Did the Fed export 42,000 factories and millions of manufacturing jobs?

No, it did not. But the Fed has a mandate from Congress to deal with the fallout.

In 16 pages of extensive Fed criticism, Grantham never even mentioned The Conundrum. By this omission, he is asserting that mass-scale Chinese bond purchases had nothing to do with causing the housing bubble. And so, his neglect of this “800-pound gorilla in the room” consigns his work to the “gratuitous Fed bashing” category.

Grantham barely even mentions the trade and immigration policies that have forced 41 million Americans onto food stamps.

Note to Grantham: Your Fed-bashing is not helping.

Grantham also unbelievably blames the snowballing trade war with China on the Fed. From page 11:

“And all of this stems from the Fed and the failed idea that it can or should interfere with employment levels by interfering with asset prices.”

Preposterous! Maybe Grantham believes that we should just accept these “employment levels”? Just lay back and take it? Grantham also doesn’t even mention our gigantic trade deficit with China. Does he really think that our trade relationship with China is sustainable?

The Fed had nothing to do with the policies that have delivered us into this state of affairs. The Fed also does not have the power to reverse said policies. And the Fed’s tools are obviously not very effective in dealing with the fallout. Of course, when the nation follows simultaneous policies of de-industrialization and mass immigration, there is no solution.

The Fed is not the cause of our problems, and people like Grantham who make it the whipping boy, contribute to the decline of this nation by deflecting attention from the real causes.

I Lecture Paul Tudor Jones

Two weeks ago I unleashed a “China Trade War” meme swarm. And I’m happy to see those memes propagated through this letter by legendary investor Paul Tudor Jones.

For example, on October 16th, I wrote:

“China began this trade war when they devalued their currency and pegged it to the dollar in 1994. They have been winning the war handily ever since.”

A few days later, Mr. Jones wrote:

“On January 1, 1994, China devalued its currency by 50% in a single day, and since then has experienced a manufacturing boom. …the US has already been in a trade war for nearly two decades; and it is the only time in this nation’s history it surrendered without ever firing a shot.”

There are many more such instances of meme propagation, but I won’t belabor the point. And Mr. Jones did indeed strengthen the swarm by adding not only gravitas, but by adding value with additional facts. For example, his point about Brazil is very important. The Chinese act all hysterical when we ask them to relinquish the peg, but the Brazilians let the real appreciate by 34% against the dollar, and there was no calamity.

Now, there is very little to quibble with in Jone’s piece. His grade for the paper is an “A”. It would have been an “A+”, but he only touched very briefly, and lightly upon the role of multinational corporations.

In the quote above, Jones says that we: “surrendered without ever firing a shot.” But both the George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations cited China as a currency manipulator right at the beginning of this trade war. So, we were trying to fight, but there is no doubt that the multinationals brought pressure to bear and are, in fact, responsible for the peg being maintained all these years. After all, there are stupendous profits from mass-scale sweat-shop operations at stake.

The next assignment for Mr. Jones is to extend his argument by encompassing the “international labor arbitrage” being practice by multinational corporations.

And one last point about Mr. Jones’ final two sentences:

“Japan has an unemployment rate that is half that of the United States and it still runs a trade surplus. Nonetheless, Japan intervened to protect its export industry, and the United States, incomprehensibly, responded with not even a whimper, let alone a bang.”

We do indeed need to address all of our trade deficits, but if you recall, the Japanese were reacting to China purchasing a large number of JGB’s under the guise of diversifying her reserves. In reality, it was an attack to drive up the yen and take share from Japanese exporters.

We are not the only target of China’s mercantilist aggression.

And then there is the geopolitics of China trying to steal islands from Japan and her other neighbors in the Pacific Ocean. There was the fishing-boat dust-up with Japan. Then the rare-earth mineral embargo, which can be considered a military threat to us since so many of our high-tech weapons rely upon them. And when you consider that Japan has been a US ally for 65 years, and the Chinese communists have never been a political ally (except for a brief period during World War 2), it makes sense to cut the Japanese some slack.

If we need to reduce our trade deficit with Japan after dealing with the Chinese, then it would be appropriate to go about it in a diplomatic manner as we did with the Plaza Accord. The Chinese have said that they will resist a similar agreement, so it is they who are making this ugly.

Note: If you can get a copy of the 1987 PBS film: “TRADER: The Documentary”, you can see Jones predicting the 1987 crash. He and his partner used an analog between the 1920s bull market and the 1980s bull to make the prediction. You can also see him day-trading futures and currencies, shouting into the phone at floor-traders, putting on his lucky sneakers, using Elliot Wave Theory, etc. If you are a trader, you will love it.

Note: Jones brought up the subject of “weaponizing financial imbalances”. I have been meaning to post something about that and will try to get it out soon.

Friday’s Trading – 10/29/2010

Nailed It
Wednesday night, I wrote:

“Given these two conditions, one might expect a day where breadth improves, but the indexes fail to put many points on the board.”

And what happened? NYSE breadth jumped by 1,000 from -957 on Wednesday to +43 on Thursday, and the SPX only advanced 1.33 points.

I also wrote:

“As invincible as the NASDAQ-100 looks at the moment, it is sporting a “grand alignment” of overbought signals.”

And what happened? After gapping-up, the QQQQ dropped like a stone for an hour straight, retraced a bit, and then dove to its intra-day low at 1pm.

Take that Nostradamus!

The treasury-bond auction got credit for turning the market around at 1pm. But by that time, the QQQQ’s 15-minute stochastic was washed out, and that switched off the “grand alignment” anyway. However, the Q’s rallied hard into the close and all the stochastics came right back up again. So, I’m not surprised that the futures drooped after the bell.

I would expect the Q’s to be weak again Friday morning, though we have the GDP report at 8:30am and traders seem to be putting a lot of stock (ha, ha) in it. This is the “advance” estimate for Q3, which means that it is the first guess. It will be revised two more times, and we won’t know the real GDP number until Christmas. However, traders think that it may effect the size and pace of the QE2 program that the Fed announces next week, so it has the potential jolt the market in either direction if there is a surprise.

Rules for Commenters

  1. You will not insult other commenters.
  2. You will not assert that other commenters are contrary indicators.
  3. All commenters will be friendly and helpful like George and JungleGirl.
  4. There will be no discussion of these rules.

Thursday’s Trading – 10/28/2010

Bad News For Bears
NYSE breadth washed-out pretty thoroughly yesterday. The last two days that it dove so deep into the depths were October 4th and 19th. And if you look at a chart of the SPX, you will see that it rallied strongly the next day in each case. If the market can’t rally today, then I would take that as a sign that the bull is growing weary.

However, the market rallied into the close yesterday. And if you look at the QQQQ’s slow-stochastic indicator, you will see that it is overbought on the 1-minute chart, the 5-minute, 15, 30, 60, daily, and weekly. So, as invincible as the NASDAQ-100 looks at the moment, it is sporting a “grand alignment” of overbought signals.

Given these two conditions, one might expect a day where breadth improves, but the indexes fail to put many points on the board.

CNBC Follies
Larry Kudlow and Erin Burnett did some ridiculous things on CNBC yesterday. Ladies first: After criticizing bloggers on Tuesday for such things as “being too negative” and “not fact-checking”, Burnett described Las Vegas as “the city on the hill” on Wednesday. Talk about not fact-checking! Sure, it’s entirely possible that devil-worshipers consider Las Vegas to be the city on the hill, but anybody who knows what the expression actually means would have been jarred by Burnett’s usage. Note to Burnett: the phrase comes from Jesus’s “Sermon on the Mount”. Look it up.

On Wednesday morning, Kudlow did an end-zone dance after the Wall Street Journal published an article on QE2. Kudlow trumpeted it as “QE2 Light”, and declared victory in his campaign to thwart the Fed. What a buffoon! And that isn’t just my opinion because he had the guy who wrote the article, Jon Hilsenrath, on his “Kudlow Report” show Wednesday night. Kudlow called it “QE2 Light” and Hilsenrath said: “I didn’t say that. You said that.” Hilsenrath, who is the Fed’s chosen journalist for official leaks, directly contradicted Kudlow’s interpretation. How did Kudlow respond? He didn’t change his attitude one bit, and continues to assert that the meaning of Hilsenrath’s article is the exact opposite of what the author himself says the meaning is. Preposterous. Kudlow is almost certainly wrong. If QE2 really sprang a leak, the mark would have plunged instead of being flat on the day.

Dirty Rotten Low Down Lying Chinese Dogs

The Chinese say that they are preparing to let their currency, the yuan, appreciate against the dollar. But of course, they are lying as always. Here is a Treasury Department report from SEVEN years ago:

“The Chinese reported that they intend to move to a market-based flexible exchange rate as they open the capital account.”

It was BS back then and it is BS now.

And now they are bitching about their own currency peg! Chinese commerce minister Chen Deming accused the USA of an “inflation attack” today. Can you believe that?

Note to Chinese idiot: Nobody is forcing you to import our inflation. Nobody is forcing you to print yuan in order to buy up dollars. Nobody is forcing you to peg your currency to ours. As a matter of fact, the last time that I checked, the whole world was urging you to relinquish the peg. When the food riots hit, you will have only yourself to blame.

I was just getting ready to write a post calling for retaliatory sanctions in response to China’s rare-earth mineral embargo, but maybe the sanctions are already on the way. Maybe the QE2 isn’t a cruise ship after all. Maybe it’s a man-o’-war.

SPX Rejected at 200-Week Average

Here is the chart that I posted on October 14th showing the expected resistance at the SPX’s 200-week moving average (click chart to enlarge):

And what happened when the SPX arrived at the 200-week line this morning?

BAM! That’s what.

Here’s a current version of the chart, only I have switched it to show candlesticks instead of bars in order to highlight the bearish gravestone doji that printed on Monday:

The SPX was able to penetrate the line by about two points before it rolled over, and that might be a bullish indication. If you look back at April on the chart, you will see that the SPX couldn’t even touch the line back then. Also, it seems to me that the market wouldn’t have gone to all this trouble of rallying without testing the April top.

Is there a catalyst strong enough to end the rally right here? I was thinking that the potential demise of the mortgage-interest deduction could be such a catalyst, but the XHB was unconcerned today, rallying a couple of pennies.

The market did sell-off pretty sharply into the bell, but SPY, QQQQ, and IWM all held above their opening gaps. So, the bulls didn’t crack there. But if you look back at all the candlesticks since the rally began, Monday’s is the only one that is a nearly-perfect gravestone doji. The September 9th candlestick was close to a gravestone, but not quite.

Nevertheless, a gravestone doji printing right on a major moving average like this is most definitely something that the bulls should be worrying about.


Larry Kudlow sez commodity inflation is out of control. If you believe him, you can load up on the DBC commodity ETF. The only problem is that it is dead flat over 2006 levels (click chart to enlarge):

If it weren’t for the oil mania of 2008, DBC would be rather dramatically UNCH since its introduction in early 2006.

In reality, Kudflation is just another propaganda talking point aimed at subjugating Federal Reserve Bank policy to the Asian sweat-shop trade.