Archive for October, 2009

Big Day for California Muni Bonds

Kurt Brouwer October 6th, 2009

Municipal bonds are coming back into favor again.  In fact, according to this Bloomberg piece [emphasis added], September 24th was close to a record day for new bond being issued.  And, California played a major part in the big day:

bloomberg-ca-muni-chart.JPG

Source: Bloomberg

California Tries to Save Municipal Market Itself (Bloomberg, October 6, 2009, Joe Mysak)

For one day, it was like old times in the municipal market. Can lightning strike twice?

The CHART OF THE DAY shows trading in municipal bonds jumped to an 18-month high on Sept. 24, after California sold $8.8 billion in short-term notes. At $34.9 billion, the par value of state and local securities traded that day was the highest since March 7, 2008, when it was $35.1 billion, according to Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board data.

…Fewer banks, the loss of major arbitrage accounts and a reduction in dealer appetite for risk have all combined to curb trading, Fischer said.

Since the beginning of the year, daily trading volume has averaged $12.2 billion. In 2008, it was $19 billion; in 2007, $25 billion.

Trading in tax-exempt or municipal securities has been way down for a couple of years and it appears that it is likely to stay down because traditional big investors in munis — banks and insurance companies — remain on the sidelines.  Individual investors and mutual funds investing in tax-exempt bonds seem to be the main investors now.

How far has the dollar fallen?

Kurt Brouwer October 5th, 2009

As you know, the dollar has been falling against the Euro and other currencies lately. But, it is sometimes hard to put that in an actual historic perspective. Also, it’s hard to understand why the dollar is falling. With this post, the goal is to give you answers on both questions — How far has the dollar fallen? And why is it falling? And, we also want to discuss what is likely to be ahead for the declining dollar.

Declining the dollar

Do you remember hearing that the Euro fell to historic lows versus the dollar in 2001? In fact, the Euro fell steadily versus the dollar for the first five years of its existence, beginning in January 1999. It did not get back to even until mid-November, 2003. At the low point for the Euro you could have bought one for 84 cents. Now, it takes a $1.46 to buy one Euro.

Here is a chart showing the fluctuations of the Euro versus the dollar since inception in 1999. This shows how many dollars it takes to buy one Euro. When the blue line is heading down, the dollar is getting stronger. When the line heads up, the dollar is getting weaker.

U.S. Dollar / Euro

stlouisfed-09-dexuseu_max_630_378.png

Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank

The gray bars in the charts indicates the relatively brief recession we experienced in 2001 and the longer recession we are experiencing now. You might notice that the 2001 recession coincided with the low point for the Euro (or conversely, the strongest point for the dollar during this time period). Why? The very strong dollar and the recession went hand in hand because the Federal Reserve raised interest rates beginning in 1999 and that led to the recession. Higher rates cause the dollar to strengthen, but they also inevitably slow down the economy. On the other hand, lower interest rates are positive for the economy, but often not for the dollar.

After the 2001 recession ended, our economy strengthened for years and the dollar fell, more or less continuously during that economic upturn. Coincidence? No. Here is a chart showing the Federal Funds target rate.

Federal Funds Rate

stlouisfed-ff-09-fredgraph.png

Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank

As you can see from this chart, the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates (blue line going up) to slow down the technology bubble in 1999. By comparing this chart to the first one, you can see that when U.S. interest rates went up, the dollar rose versus the Euro. When the economy fell into recession in 2001 (the first area in gray), the Fed began slashing interest rates and the Euro finally began strengthening versus the dollar. The Fed began raising rates again in 2004 due to inflation concerns and the Euro stabilized versus the dollar until the Fed stopped raising rates in 2006. At that point, the Euro began climbing and the process accelerated when U.S interest rates were cut significantly in 2007 as the economy began to weaken.

Flight to the dollar during financial panic

During the financial panic at the end of 2008 and early in 2009, the dollar strengthened considerably.  This chart is the same data as in chart number one, the dollar versus the Euro, but for the period of 2008 and so far in 2009.  I also took off the recession bar.  Remember that the blue line going down means the dollar is strengthening versus the Euro, while the blue line going up means the dollar is weakening.

stlouisfed-dollar-vs-euro-08and09fredgraph.png

Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank

The flight to the dollar during the panic began in the Summer of 2008 and ended in early 2009.  As the panic subsided, other considerations such as interest rates took hold again and the dollar again began to weaken against the Euro.  At the low point, it took nearly $1.60 to buy one Euro.  Then, during the depths of the financial panic, it took only $1.25 to buy one Euro, but now that same Euro would cost $1.46 or so.

What’s Next?

The big difficulty we face now is that the economy is weak and the Fed likes to have low interest rates to help the economy begin to grow again.  Low interest rates are helpful to overall economic activity, but, as you have seen, lower rates generally hurt the dollar.  If we wanted to help out the weak dollar, the response would ideally be to raise interest rates.  However, due to serious weakness in the economy, the Fed is hampered in its ability to respond to this situation and I believe it will opt to keep very low interest rates in order to promote economic growth.

You may hear various members of the Federal Reserve or politicians or pundits decrying the weak dollar.  However, for decades, our government’s philosophy during recessions has been to publicly espouse a strong dollar while, at the same time, cutting interest rates to strengthen the economy and give unemployment a boost.  This has traditionally been done despite the fact that lower interest rates generally lead to a weaker dollar.  I don’t see anything in the cards that appears to have changed that policy.   Therefore, I expect continued pressure on the dollar as the Fed seeks to get economic activity going again.

Unemployment as far as the eye can see

Kurt Brouwer October 5th, 2009

Unemployment is approaching 10% and it is likely to go higher.

carpe-diem-jobless.jpg

Source: Carpe Diem

In this chart, based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the gray bars indicates times of recession.  The blue bars indicate a period of time, after a given recession officially ended, in which unemployment continued to go up.  For example, in the early 1990s, unemployment continued moving up for 15 months after the recession ended.  The last recession did not seek a peak in unemployment until 19 months after the recession ended.

So, assuming this recession ended in August or September, then unemployment might not peak until the end of 2010 or even early 2011.  In other words, even though the news on unemployment is grim, it is not likely to get better soon.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports on the continuing slump in our economy’s ability to produce jobs [emphasis added]:

The Employment Situation (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, October 2, 2009)

Nonfarm payroll employment continued to decline in September (-263,000), and the unemployment rate (9.8 percent) continued to trend up, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The largest job losses were in construction, manufacturing, retail trade, and government.

…Since the start of the recession in December 2007, the number of unemployed persons has increased by 7.6 million to 15.1 million, and the unemployment rate has doubled to 9.8 percent…

…The civilian labor force participation rate declined by 0.3 percentage point in September to 65.2 percent…

Earlier this year, we were told that the economic stimulus plan — the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 — was vital to getting job growth back on track.  At the time, the administration produced a chart estimating future unemployment with or without the stimulus program.

innocent-bystanders-stimulus-vs-unemployment-september-dots.gif

Source: Innocent Bystanders

The web site Innocent Bystanders has updated the chart to include current unemployment levels, which are considerably higher than the administration’s ‘no stimulus’ worst case scenario.  The dots represent recent monthly unemployment percentages from the BLS.  We were told that, with economic stimulus unemployment would peak at 8% and would now be trending down.  Oops.

I don’t really blame the administration for being wrong.  Our economy is so complex that predictions can often go astray.  However, I do note that when Congress or other politicians make claims in favor of pending legislation, then considerable skepticism on our part is warranted.  The skepticism is warranted because the benefits of legislation often get exaggerated, but the costs get lowballed.  Imagine that.

For more on Congress inability to estimate the true cost of legislation, see:

Healthcare: Underestimating the cost

Don’t Tell Congress What Comes After Trillion

6% Say Congress Listens Well

Kurt Brouwer October 2nd, 2009

Actually, I’m surprised it was that high.  This chart gives the results of a recent Fox New/Opinion Dynamics poll as shown on the American Magazine web site:

…Only 6 percent of those surveyed said that Congress pays a great deal of attention to what regular Americans think when it decides what to do. Thirty percent said Congress paid some attention, 39 percent said not much, and 23 percent said none at all. Although Democrats control both houses of Congress, 49 percent of those who identify as Democrats said Congress pays not much or no attention at all to what regular Americans think.

american-fox-image.gif

Source: American Magazine / Fox News / Opinion Dynamics

Unemployment Approaches 10%

Kurt Brouwer October 2nd, 2009

The news on unemployment was grim today, with the rate moving up very close to 10%.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports on the continuing slump in our economy’s ability to produce jobs [emphasis added]:

The Employment Situation (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, October 2, 2009)

Nonfarm payroll employment continued to decline in September (-263,000), and the unemployment rate (9.8 percent) continued to trend up, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The largest job losses were in construction, manufacturing, retail trade, and government.

…Since the start of the recession in December 2007, the number of unemployed persons has increased by 7.6 million to 15.1 million, and the unemployment rate has doubled to 9.8 percent…

…The civilian labor force participation rate declined by 0.3 percentage point in September to 65.2 percent…

In addition to the 15.1 million unemployed people, there is another severe problem, which is the number of people who are working part-time even though they really want full-time employment.

…In September, the number of persons working part time for economic reasons was little changed at 9.2 million.

The August number for those working part time even though they want full time employment was 9.1 million.  I thought it was interesting that the report characterized the increase to 9.2 million as ‘little changed.’

As the economy improves, employers will probably increase the hours worked by millions of part-time workers, getting them up to full-time, before actually adding new workers.

In addition to involuntary part-time workers, there are millions of folks who are not even looking for work.  Right now, they are not counted as being unemployed.  As the economy improves, some of these folks will again look for work and that will lead to higher unemployment statistics also.

…About 2.2 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force in September, an increase of 615,000 from a year earlier…They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey…

26.5 million unemployed, underemployed or not even looking…

If you tally up these three categories, then there are 26.5 million people who are either unemployed, underemployed or not even seeking employment.

Given how weak economic activity is, I expect the unemployment rate to move over 10% quite soon.  We would have to go back to 1982-83 to find a time when unemployment rates were at or even slightly above 10%.

Unfortunately, I do not see anything on the near-term horizon that would suggest a turnaround in the economy’s ability to create new jobs.  As a result, unemployment should stay stubbornly high well into next year.

Update:  Uh oh

Zero Hedge blog points out something I missed.  Since March 2009, the BLS may have overstated employment by over 800,000 jobs.  Here is the relevant section from the BLS report [emphasis added]:


…Each year, the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey employment estimates are benchmarked to comprehensive counts of employment for the month of March. These counts are derived from state unemployment insurance tax records that nearly all employers are required to file. For national CES employment series, the annual benchmark revisions over the last 10 years have averaged plus or minus two-tenths of one percent of total nonfarm employment. The preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision indicates a downward adjustment to March 2009 total nonfarm employment of 824,000 (0.6 percent)…

In other words, the revision for this year will be triple the normal revision.  Hoo boy.  I’m not sure when this revision will be incorporated in the monthly employment report.  Does this mean that unemployment is already well over 10%?

Via: Zero Hedge

« Prev - Next »