Yellen’s Wand Is Running Low on Magic

By Doug French, Contributing Editor

How important is housing to the American economy?

If a 2011 SMU paper entitled "Housing's Contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) quot; is right, nothing moves the economic needle like housing. It accounts for 17% to 18% of GDP. And don't forget that home buyers fill their homes with all manner of stuff—and that homeowners have more skin in insurance on what's likely to be their family's most important asset. All claims to the contrary, the disappointing first quarter housing numbers expose the Federal Reserve as impotent at influencing GDP's most important component.

The Fed: Housing's Best Friend

 

No wonder every modern Fed chairman has lowered rates to try to crank up housing activity, rationalizing that low rates make mortgage payments more affordable. Back when he was chair, Ben Bernanke wrote in the Washington Post, "Easier financial conditions will promote economic growth. For example, lower mortgage rates will make housing more affordable and allow more homeowners to refinance."

In her first public speech, new Fed Chair Janet Yellen said one of the benefits to keeping interest rates low is to "make homes more affordable and revive the housing market."

As quick as they are to lower rates and increase prices, Fed chairs are notoriously slow at spotting their own bubble creation. In 2002, Alan Greenspan viewed the comparison of rising home prices to a stock market bubble as "imperfect." The Maestro concluded, "Even if a bubble were to develop in a local market, it would not necessarily have implications for the nation as a whole."

Three years later—in 2005—Ben Bernanke was asked about housing prices being out of control. "Well, I guess I don't buy your premise," he said. "It's a pretty unlikely possibility. We've never had a decline in home prices on a nationwide basis." With never a bubble in sight, the Fed constantly supports housing while analysts and economists count on the housing stimulus trick to work.

2014 GDP Depends on Housing

 

"There's more expansion ahead for the housing market in 2014, with starts and new-home sales continuing to rise at double-digit rates, thanks to tight inventory," writes Gillian B. White for Kiplinger. The "Timely, Trusted Personal Finance Advice and Business Forecast(er)" says GDP will bounce back. Fannie Mae Chief Economist Doug Duncan says, "Our full-year 2014 economic forecast accounts for three key growth drivers: an acceleration in spending activity from private-sector forces, waning fiscal drag from the federal government, and continued improvement in the housing market."
We'll see about that last one.

Greatest Housing Subsidy of All Time Running Out of Gas

 

With the central bank flooding the markets with liquidity, holding short rates low, and buying long term debt, mortgage rates have been consistently below 5% since the start of 2009. For all of 2012, the 30 year fixed mortgage rate stayed below 4%. In the post gold standard era (after 1971), rates have never been this low for this long. The Fed's unprecedented mortgage subsidy has helped the market make a dead cat bounce since the crash of 2008. After peaking in July 2006 at 206.52, the Case-Shiller 20 City composite index bottomed in February 2012 at 134.06. It had recovered to 165.50 as of January. However, while low rates have propped up prices, sales of existing homes have fallen in seven of the last eight months. In March resales were down 7.5% from a year earlier. That's the fifth month in a row in which sales fell below the year earlier level.

David Stockman writes, "March sales volume remained the slowest since July 2012." He listed 13 major metro areas whose sales declined from a year ago, led by San Jose, down 18%. The three worst performers and 6 of the bottom 11 were California cities. Las Vegas and Phoenix were also in the bottom 10, with sales down double digits from a year ago. This after housing guru Ivy Zelman told CNBC in February, "California is back to where it was in nirvana." Considering the entire nation, she said, "I think nirvana is not far around the corner… I think that I have to tell you, I'm probably the most bullish I've ever been fundamentally, and I'm dating myself, been around for over 20 years, so I've seen a lot of ups and downs."

Housing Headwinds

 

Housing is contributing less to overall growth than during both the days of 20% mortgage rates in the 1980s and the S&L crisis of the early 1990s. In Phoenix, where home prices have bounced back and Wall Street money has vacuumed up thousands of distressed properties, the market has gone flat. In Belfiore Real Estates' April market report, Jim Belfiore wrote, "The bad news for home builders is they have created a glut of supply in previously hot market areas… Potential buyers, as might be expected, feel no sense of urgency to buy because they believe this glut is going to exist indefinitely."

Nick Timiraos points out in the Wall Street Journal that with a 4.5% mortgage rate and prices 20% below their peak, "… homes are still more affordable than in most periods between 1990 and 2008." So why is demand for new homes so tepid? And why have refinancings fallen 58% year over year in the first quarter?
"Housing's rocky recovery could signal weakness more broadly in the economy," writes Timiraos, "reflecting the lingering damage from the bust that has left millions of households unable to participate in any housing recovery. Many still have properties worth less than the amount borrowers owe on their mortgages, while others have high levels of debt, low levels of savings, and patchy incomes."

More specifically, "So far we have experienced 7 million foreclosures," David Stockman, former director of the Office of Management and Budget, writes. "Beyond that there are still nine million homeowners seriously underwater on their mortgages, and there are millions more who are stranded in place because they don't have enough positive equity to cover transactions costs and more stringent down payment requirements." Young people used to drive real estate growth, but not anymore. The percentage of young home buyers has been declining for years. Between 1980 and 2000, the percentage of homeowners among people in their late twenties fell from 43% to 38%. And after the crash, the downtrend continued. The percentage of young people who obtained mortgages between 2009 and 2011 was just half what it was ten years ago.

Young people don't seem to view owning a home as the American dream, as was the case a generation ago. Plus, who has room to take on more debt when 7 in 10 students graduate college with an average $30k in student loan debt? "First time home buyers are typically an important source of incremental housing demand, so their smaller presence in the market affects house prices and construction quite broadly," Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told homebuilders two years ago.

There's not much good news for housing these days. For a little while, the Fed's suppression of interest rates juiced housing enough to distract Americans from weak job creation and stagnant real wages. Don't have a job? No problem! Just borrow against the appreciation of your house to feed your family. But Yellen's interest rate wand looks to be out of magic. The government had a pipe dream of white picket fences for everyone. But Americans can't refinance their way to wealth. Especially in the Greater Depression.

Read more about the Fed’s back-breaking economic shenanigans and the ways to protect your assets in the Casey Daily Dispatch—your daily go-to guide for gold, silver, energy, technology, and crisis investing.

Click here to sign up—it’s Free.

The article Yellen’s Wand Is Running Low on Magic was originally published at Casey Research

Sign up for one of our Free Trading Webinars....Just Click Here!

 

Are Valuations Really Too High?

By John Mauldin

The older I get and the more I research and study, the more convinced I become that one of the more important traits of a good investor or businessman is not simply to come up with the right answer but to be able to ask the right question. The questions we ask often reveal the biases in our thinking, and we are all prone to what behavioral psychologists call confirmation bias: we tend to look for (and thus to see, and to ask about) things that confirm our current thinking.

I try to spend a significant part of my time researching and thinking about things that will tell me why my current belief system is wrong, testing my opinions against the ideas of others, some of whom are genuine outliers.

I have done quite a number of media interviews and question and answer sessions with audiences in the past few months, and one question keeps coming up: “Are valuations too high?” In this week’s letter we’re going to try to look at the various answers (orthodox and not) one could come up with to answer that basic question, and then we’ll look at market conditions in general. This letter may print a little longer as there are going to be a lot of charts.

I am back in Dallas today, getting ready to leave Monday for San Diego and my Strategic Investment Conference. I’m really excited about the array of speakers we have this year. We’re going to share the conference with you in a different way this year. My associate Worth Wray and I are going to do a brief summary of the speakers’ presentations every day and send that out as a short Thoughts from the Frontline for four days running. Plus, for those who are interested in my more immediate reactions, I suggest you follow me on Twitter. There are still a few spots available at the conference, as we have expanded the venue, and if you would like to see who is speaking or maybe decide to show up at the last minute (which you should), just follow this link. Now let’s jump into the letter.

Take It to the Limit

First, let’s examine three ways to look at stock market valuations for the S&P 500. The first is the Shiller P/E ratio, which is a ten year smoothed curve that in theory takes away some of the volatility caused by recessions. If this metric is your standard, I think you would conclude that stocks are expensive and getting close to the danger zone, if not already in it. Only by the standards of the 2000 tech bubble and the year 1929 do you find higher normalized P/E ratios.



But if you look at the 12 month trailing P/E ratio, you could easily conclude that stocks are moderately expensive but not yet in bubble territory.



And yet again, if you look at the 12 month forward P/E ratio, it might be easy to conclude that stocks are fairly, even cheaply priced.



In a Perfect World

Earnings are projected to grow rather significantly. Let’s visit our old friend the S&P 500 Earnings and Estimate Report, produced by Howard Silverblatt (it’s a treasure trove of data, and it opens in Excel here.

I copied and pasted below just the material relevant for our purposes. Basically, you can see that using the consensus estimate for as-reported earnings would result in a relatively low price to earnings ratio of 13.5 at today’s S&P 500 price. If you think valuations will be higher than 13.5 at the end of 2015, then you probably want to be a buyer of stocks. (Again, you data junkies can see far more data in the full report.)



But this interpretation begs a question: How much of 2013 equity returns were due to actual earnings growth and how much were due to people’s being willing to pay more for a dollar’s worth of earnings? Good question. It turns out that the bulk of market growth in 2013 came from multiple expansion in the U.S., Europe, and United Kingdom. Apparently, we think (at least those who are investing in the stock market think) that the good times are going to continue to roll.



The chart above shows the breakdown of 2013 return drivers in global markets, but this next chart, from my friend Rob Arnott, shows that roughly 30% of large cap U.S. equity (S&P 500) returns over the last 30 years have come from multiple expansion; and recently, rising P/E has accounted for the vast majority of stock returns in the face of flat earnings.



The Future of Earnings

What kind of returns can we expect from today’s valuations? There are two ways we can look at it. One way is by looking at expected returns from current valuations, which is how Jeremy Grantham of GMO regularly does it. The following chart shows his projections for the average annual real return over the next seven years.

To continue reading this article from Thoughts from the Frontline – a free weekly publication by John Mauldin, renowned financial expert, best-selling author, and Chairman of Mauldin Economics – Please Click Here.

The article Thoughts from the Frontline: Are Valuations Really Too High? was originally published at Mauldin Economics

Sign up for one of our Free Trading Webinars....Just Click Here!

 

Commodities Market Recap and this Weeks Stops and Trading Numbers....Crude Oil, Natural Gas, Gold, Silver, Coffee, Sugar and More!

We've asked our trading partner Michael Seery to give our readers a weekly recap of the futures market. He has been Senior Analyst for close to 15 years and has extensive knowledge of all of the commodity and option markets......


Crude oil futures are trading below their 20 day but still above their 100 day moving average stating that the trend is mixed as I am currently sitting on the sidelines as there is no trend currently. The fundamentals are bearish in oil as stock piles are at 85 year highs as prices peaked at 104 last month now looking at support between 97-98 dollars a barrel as I think lower prices are ahead however I am not currently participating in this market so wait for better chart structure to develop.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: OK

Get our "Advanced Crude Oil Study – 15 Minute Range"

Natural Gas Futures. I had been recommending a long position in the June natural gas as prices broke down yesterday hitting a 10 day low and stopping us out of the market for a loss so sit on the sidelines and wait for better chart structure to develop. This was a disappointing trade as I thought prices were going to break above 5.00 but that did not happen so it’s time to lick your wounds and find a better trend.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: SOLID

Gold futures in the June contract settled last Friday at 1,309 while going out today around 1,290 down by about $20 for the trading week as the Ukrainian situation has stalled sending gold prices back down into the recent trading range. Gold futures are trading below their 20 but right at their 100 day moving average as prices have been consolidating in the last 5 weeks trading in a $30 range as I’ve been sitting on the sidelines waiting for a better chart pattern to develop but if you are looking to get into this market on the long side I would buy at today’s prices placing my stop at the 10 day low of 1,365 risking around $2,500 per contract and if you’re looking to get short this market I would sell at today’s price while putting my stop loss at 1,310 risking around $2,000 as the chart structure is relatively tight at the current time. Gold prices rallied from 1,180 all the way up near $1,400 an ounce 2 months ago so this is basically the 50% retracement and I think you will see a consolidation for quite some time so keep a close eye on this chart as it appears to me that a breakout is looming.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT

Is it Time to Admit That Gold Peaked in 2011?

Silver futures in New York continued their bearish trend this week settling last Friday at 19.55 finishing lower by about $.45 for the trading week as I still think there’s a possibility that a spike bottom occurred in last Fridays trade as $19 has been very difficult to break on the downside. Silver futures have come all the way from slightly above $22 in late February all the way down to today’s level and from $35 in 2013 so this is been a bear market for well over 1 year as there seems to be a lack of interest, however eventually silver will turn around and join the rest of commodities higher but at this point there’s just very little interest. Silver futures are trading below their 20 and 100 day moving average telling you that the trend is lower and as I’ve talked about many times before if you have deep pockets and you’re a longer-term investor I think prices down at these levels are relatively cheap and if prices went lower I would continue to dollar cost average as there is real demand for silver.
TREND: LOWER
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT

Here's our Critical Line in the Sand for Silver

Coffee futures in the July contract were sharply lower this week finishing down over 1150 points this Friday afternoon to close around 184.00 a pound and I’ve been recommending a long position in coffee for quite some time as we got stopped out at the 194 level today which was the 2 week low so sit on the sidelines and wait for another trend to develop as prices could possibly retest the recent lows of around 170. Coffee futures are trading below their 20 day and above their 100 day moving average as the trend is sideways to lower currently so look for another market that is in a stronger trend but keep a close eye on this market as I do think prices are limited to the downside and I would be an interested buyer around the 165 level which was hit in early April. Coffee prices broke above to new contract highs 3 weeks ago but prices have just petered out here in recent weeks as crop estimates start to come out in the next several weeks.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: POOR

Check out our Coffee Traders Facebook page

Sugar futures finished the week down around 20 points trading in nonvolatile action as prices are testing support at 17.07 settling this Friday at 17.20 and if that level is broken then I would place my stop loss above the 10 day high which stands at 18.03 risking around 100 points or $1,100 dollars per contract. The chart structure is excellent at the current time as the trend is lower as prices are trading below their 20 & 100 day moving averages as prices have been in a 100 point trading range over the last month so keep a close eye on the 17 level for a possible short as the soft commodities have turned negative recently. TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: OUTSTANDING

Why Are So Many Boomers Working Longer?

When Do You Add To Your Winning Trade? This has always been a very interesting question because it can create a situation of going from rags to riches or from riches to rags in a very short amount of time. Many times I see traders abuse pyramiding or adding to positions with utter lack of any type of money management system in place and letting it ride which usually ends up in a complete wipeout of capital and sometimes even worse.

Commodity prices can move very quickly with large gains or loses like we experienced in the 2008 crash of stock and commodity prices, so you always have to use stops and not fall in love or marry a position. In my opinion the answer to this question is add only once to the trade if that position has made you at least 2%-3% of your account balance while still having stop losses on all positions that equal 2% loss at a maximum risk. Remember your stop loses will be different on both positions because of the fact that you entered those trades at a different date and price.

There are many different theories about how long does a meaningful consolidation have to last before you enter a trade on the breakout to the up or downside? In my opinion I always want to see a consolidation that lasts at least 8 or more weeks before I would consider entering. The reason that I want a longer consolidation is to try and avoid a bunch of false breakouts such as a 10 or 15 day consolidations which happen all the time, so I am trying to put the odds in my favor by trading the breakout of at least 8 weeks or more and the longer such as a 11 or 13 week consolidation the better. At this present time cocoa is in a major consolidation.

Want more call for this weeks commodity markets? Orange Juice, Wheat, Cotton, Cattle....Just Click Here!


Sign up for one of our Free Trading Webinars....Just Click Here!

What You and Monica Lewinsky Might Have in Common

By Dennis Miller

Collateral damage can assume many forms—and though some may be more newsworthy than others, the latter are no less real, nor any less frightening.


On Tuesday, controversial radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh called Monica Lewinsky “collateral damage in Hillary Clinton’s war on women,” saying that President Bill Clinton and his wife destroyed the former White House intern “after he got his jollies, after he got his consensual whatevers.”

Last month, Jeremy Grantham, cofounder of GMO, a Boston based asset management firm that oversees $112 billion in client funds, dubbed savers “collateral damage” of quantitative easing and the Federal Reserve’s continued commitment to low interest rates.

Would it be worse to be known as the “president’s mistress” for more than a decade and, as Lewinsky claims, to be unable to find a normal job? Maybe. But it’s no laughing matter either to find yourself penniless in your “golden years.”

Signs of Monetary Collateral Damage Among Seniors

 

The 55-plus crowd accounts for 22% of all bankruptcy filings in the U.S.—up 12% from just 13 years ago—and seniors age 65 and up are the fastest growing population segment seeking bankruptcy protection. Given the wounds bankruptcy inflicts on your credit, reputation, and pride, it’s safe to assume those filing have exhausted all feasible alternatives.

But even seniors in less dire straits are finding it difficult to navigate low interest rate waters. Thirty seven percent of 65 to 74 year olds still had a mortgage or home equity line of credit in 2010, up from 21% in 1989. For those 75 and older, that number jumped from 2% to 21% during the same timeframe—another mark of a debt filled retirement becoming the norm. With an average balance of $9,300 as of 2012, the 65 plus cohort is also carrying more credit card debt than any other age group.

While climbing out of a $9,300 hole isn’t impossible, the national average credit card APR of 15% sure makes it difficult. For those with bad credit, that rate jumps to 22.73%—not quite the same as debtor’s prison, but close.

None of this points to an aging population adjusting its money habits to thrive under the Fed’s low interest rate regime.

Minimize Your Part of Comparative Negligence

 

A quick side note on tort law. Most states have some breed of the comparative negligence rule on the books. This means a jury can reduce the monetary award it awards a tort plaintiff by the percentage of the plaintiff’s fault. Bob’s Pontiac hits Mildred’s Honda, causing Mildred to break her leg. Mildred sues Bob and the jury awards her $100,000, but also finds she was 7% at fault for the accident. Mildred walks with $93,000. (Actually, Mildred walks with $62,000 and her lawyer with $31,000, but I digress.)

Comparative-negligence rules exist because when a bad thing happens, the injured party may be partly responsible. For someone planning for retirement, the bad thing at issue is too much debt and too little savings. Through low interest rates, the Federal Reserve is responsible for X% of the problem.

Though ex-Fed chief Bernanke doesn’t seem to see it that way—in a dinner conversation with hedge fund manager David Einhorn, he asserted that raising interest rates to benefit savers wouldn’t be the right move for the economy because it would require borrowers to pay more for capital. Well, there you have it. And there’s nothing you can do about that X%. You can, however, reduce or eliminate your contribution.
In other words, you don’t have to be collateral damage; you can affect how your life plays out.

Money Lessons from Zen Buddhism

 

This might sound like a “duh” statement, but it bears repeating from time to time. Inheritance windfall from that great-aunt in Des Moines you’d forgotten about aside, there are two ways to eliminate debt and retire well: spend less or make more.

Rising healthcare costs, emergency car repairs, and the like are real impediments to reducing your bills. Costs rooted in attempts to “keep up with the Joneses,” however, are avoidable. Those attempts are also futile. A new, even richer Mr. Jones is always around the bend.

Instead of overspending for show, make like a Buddhist and let go of your attachment to things and your ego about owning them. Spring for that Zen rock garden if you must and start raking.

One of the wealthier men I know drove around for years with a gardening glove as a makeshift cover for his Peugeot’s worn out, stick shift knob. It looked shabby, but this man wasn’t a car guy and had no need to impress. As far as I know, the gardening glove worked just fine until he finally donated the car to charity and happily took his tax deduction. Maintaining your car isn’t overspending, but you catch my drift. Dropping efforts to show off can benefit us all.

That said, keeping up isn’t always about show. You may feel pressure to overspend just to be able to enjoy time with your friends and family. Maybe you can no longer afford the annual Vail ski week with your in laws or the flight to Hawaii for your nephew’s bar mitzvah. Maybe your friends are hosting caviar dinners, but you’re now on a McDonald’s budget and can no longer participate.

Spending less in order to stay within your budget can mean missing out on experiences, not just stuff. If you’re in this camp, there’s no reason to hang your head. As I mentioned above, you can spend less or you can make more. The latter is far more fun.

An Investment Strategy to Prevent You from Becoming Collateral Damage

 

While it’s tempting to start speculating with your retirement money, resist. If you have non-retirement dollars to play with and the constitution to handle it, carefully curated speculative investments can give you a welcome boost. However, if all of your savings is allocated for retirement, just don’t do it.

Unless you’re still working, how, then, can you make more money in a low-interest-rate world? At present, my team of analysts and I recommend investing your retirement dollars via the 50-20-30 approach:

• 50%: Sector diversified equities providing growth and income and a high margin of safety.
• 20%: Investments made for higher yield coupled with appropriate stop losses.
• 30%: Conservative, stable income vehicles.

No single investment should make up more than 5% of your retirement portfolio.

Whether you’re designing your retirement blueprint from scratch or want to apply our 50-20-30 strategy to your existing plan, the Miller’s Money team can help. Each Thursday enjoy exclusive updates on unique investing and retirement topics by signing up for my free weekly newsletter.

Don’t let the Fed’s anti-senior and anti-saver policies unravel your retirement.  

Click here to start receiving Miller’s Money Weekly today.

The article Collateral Damage: What You and Monica Lewinsky Have in Common was originally published at Millers Money

Sign up for one of our Free Trading Webinars....Just Click Here!

How a Big Cat Started Europe’s Addiction to Crude Oil

By Marin Katusa, Chief Energy Investment Strategist

On July 1, 1911, a German gunboat named Panther sailed into the port of Agadir, Morocco, and changed history. For the previous two decades, a faction within the British Admiralty had called for the navy to switch from coal fired ships to ones powered by a new fuel. Admiral John Fisher, First Sea Lord, led the charge, trumpeting oil’s numerous advantages: It had nearly twice the thermal content of coal, required less manpower to use, allowed refueling at sea, and burned with less telltale smoke.

Doesn’t matter, replied naval tradition: Britain lacks oil, and she has lots of coal. The switch would put the greatest navy in the world at the mercy of burgeoning oil rich countries and the oil trusts that operate in them. (It didn’t help that the navy’s first test of oil firing in 1903 engulfed the ship in a cloud of black smoke.)

It wasn’t common knowledge at the time, but Germany had surpassed the mighty British Empire in manufacturing in the late 1800s, most notably in the production of steel. Britain’s manufacturing base had largely moved abroad, taking investment along with it. Germany, meanwhile, was determined to build up the quality as well as quantity of its goods. That included its military technology and capacity, especially its navy. Has a familiar ring, doesn’t it?

Then came the Panther. Germany said she was there to protect German businessmen in restive Morocco, a reason more credible had there actually been German businessmen in Morocco. Britain read it as a challenge to its supremacy, a maneuver toward expansionism, and a threat to trade routes west out of the Mediterranean.

Britain’s young, up and coming home secretary wondered what specifications would be required to outmaneuver the ships of Germany’s growing navy. The war college gave a deceptively simple answer: a speed of at least 25 knots.

Coal couldn’t do it—too many boilers, too much weight, too long to build up a head of steam, too short a range. But oil could.

With the Panther’s arrival in Morocco, Admiral Fisher’s faction gained a new and eloquent advocate for converting the British Navy to oil, and it wasn’t long before Home Secretary Winston Churchill became First Lord of the Admiralty and the fellow whom history often credits with guiding the British Empire’s destiny with oil.

Germany’s Great Game

 

If Britain were to switch its navy to oil, it would need a secure supply of the stuff. Churchill saw that the struggling Anglo-Persian Oil Co. had the resources, but lacked the cash.

With Germany setting its cap for control of Middle Eastern oil—building a railroad between Berlin and Baghdad was the last straw—it wasn’t hard for Churchill to convince the Parliament that cutting a deal with Anglo-Persian Oil Co. was a good idea.

In exchange for an infusion of cash, the British government got 51% of the company’s stock. A hush hush rider on that deal was a contract for Anglo-Persian to supply oil to the Royal Navy, with very favorable terms, for the next 20 years.

All this happened just in time for the spark that finally ignited the Great War, or as we call it today, World War I. Because of Churchill’s preparations, among them a new class of oil-fired ships, Allied naval forces were able to restrict the flow of essential supplies to Germany.

By war’s end, every country realized the strategic importance of a secure supply of oil. The players have been maneuvering ever since.

Fast-Forward 100 Years—the Rise of Mother Russia

 

The fortunes of the various players may change, but the scrimmage remains the same. Oil does everything from power vehicles on land and sea to supply manufacturers with the building blocks of medicines, plastics, and a host of other products.

The Soviet Union was a global powerhouse and a major oil producer until its disintegration in 1991, and Russia then had to shop hat in hand for loans to keep its economy afloat. It was largely its oil and gas resources that have enabled Vladimir Putin, Russia’s canny and forceful president, to wrest his country back onto the world stage of heavyweights in recent years. The European Union is currently Russia’s largest customer.

Indeed, Europe is feeling the squeeze from Russia, which has gunned hard to make it easy to get its oil and gas, but not so easy to keep getting them. Putin will happily play hardball with any country that won’t meet his terms—just ask Ukraine—and doesn’t mind if others down the line feel the sting of his stick.

The EU-28 imports over 50% of all the energy consumed. Russia provides about one-third of all the oil and natural gas imported by EU-28. Germany is the largest importer of Russian oil and natural gas.

The member countries of the European Union may be cheering Belarus on, but they’re also taking the hint from Russia. And they’d better: Between growing demand in Asia and instability in the Middle East, the European Union faces some serious energy challenges.

Slowly but surely, Europe is waking up to its situation. Alternative energies are a noble goal, but the hard truth is that the technology isn’t there yet to replace hydrocarbon fuels. For energy security, there’s little choice for EU countries but to back the oil and gas companies that call Europe home.

“We must get on and explore our resources in order to understand the potential,” declared Britain’s energy minister in July. Other countries, such as Germany, are taking on this pursuit as well. We believe that governments and oil giants in other European countries will follow their lead.

This article is from the Casey Daily Dispatch, a free daily e-letter written by renowned investment experts in the fields of precious metals, energy, technology, and crisis investing. Click here to get it your inbox every day.

The article How a Big Cat Started Europe’s Addiction to Oil was originally published at Casey Research

Advanced Gaps and Candlesticks Training....Just Click Here!
 

Is it Time to Admit That Gold Peaked in 2011?

By Jeff Clark, Senior Precious Metals Analyst

Have you seen this “real price of gold” chart that’s been making waves? Among other things, it purports to show the gold price adjusted for inflation over the past 223 years. Notice the 1980 vs. 2011 levels.

The chart makes it seem that on an inflation-adjusted basis, gold has matched its 1980 peak in 2011, or nearly so. A mainstream analyst who still thinks of gold as a “barbarous relic,” a government official who doesn’t want people to think of gold as money, or an Internet blogger looking for some attention might try to convince you that this proves that the gold bull market is over, arguing that the 2011 peak of $1,921 is the equivalent of the 1970s mania peak of $850 in January of 1980.

The logic is flawed, however; even if it were true that gold has matched its 1980 peak in inflation-adjusted prices, it would not prove that the top is in this time. This is not the 1970s, the global economy is under very different pressures, and there’s no rational basis at all for saying the top this time has to be at the same or similar level as last time.

That’s even if it were true that gold has matched its 1980 peak—but it hasn’t.

Inflation-Adjusted Gold Has NOT Matched Its 1980 Peak

 

First, if you go by official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic numbers, $850 in 1980 is equivalent to $2,320 in 2011, when gold hit its peak thus far in the current cycle. (It’s $2,403 in 2013 dollars, as is said to be used in the chart.)

We don’t know what data the authors of the chart used, nor their inflation adjustment method, so it’s hard to say what the problem is, but at the very least, we can say the chart is very misleading.

But there’s more. As you probably know, the government has made numerous changes to the way it calculates inflation—the Consumer Price Index (CPI)—since 1980. So, even the BLS number we’ve given grossly underestimates the real difference between the 2011 and 1980 peaks.

For a more apples to apples comparison, we should adjust for inflation using the government’s 1980 formula. And for that, whom better to ask than John Williams of Shadow Government Statistics (AKA Shadow Stats), the world’s leading expert on phony US government statistics?

I asked John to apply the CPI formula from January 1980 to the $1,921 gold price in 2011, to give us a more accurate inflation adjusted picture. Here’s what his data show.

Using the 1980 formula, the monthly average price of gold for January 1980 would be the equivalent of $8,598.80 today. The actual peak—$850 on January 21, 1980—isn’t shown in the chart, but it would equate to a whopping $10,823.70 today.

The Shadow Stats chart paints a completely different picture than the first chart. The current CPI formula grossly dilutes just how much inflation has occurred over the past 34 years. It’s so misleading that investment decisions based on it—like whether to buy or sell gold—could wreak havoc on a portfolio.

This could easily be the end of the discussion, but there are many more reasons to believe that the gold price has not peaked for the current bull cycle…...

Percentage Rise Has Been Much Smaller

 

Inflation adjusted numbers are not the only measure that matters. The percentage climb during the 1970s bull market was dramatically greater than what we experienced from 2001 to 2011. Here’s a comparison of the percentage gain during both periods.

From the 1970 low to the January 1980 peak, gold rose 2,346%. It climbed only 535% from the 2001 low to the September 2011 high—nowhere near mimicking that prior bull market.

Silver Scantly Participated in the 2011 Run-Up

 

After 31 years of trading, silver has yet to even reach its nominal price from 1980. It surged to $48.70 in 2011—but it hit $50 in January 1980.

On an inflation-adjusted basis, using the same data from John Williams, silver would need to hit $568 to match its 1980 equivalent.

The fact that silver has lagged this much—when its greater volatility would normally move its price by a greater percentage than gold—further shows that 2011 was not the equivalent of 1980.

No Bubble Characteristics in 2011

 

I’ll get some arguments from the mainstream on this one. “Of course gold was in a bubble in 2011—look at the chart!”

Yes, gold had a nice run-up that year. It rose 38.6% from January 1 to the September 6 peak. Anyone holding gold at that time was very happy. But that’s not a bubble. One of the major characteristics of a bubble is that prices go parabolic.

And that’s exactly what we saw in 1979-1980:

• In the 12 months leading up to its January 21, 1980 peak, gold surged an incredible 270%.

• In contrast, the year leading up to the September 6, 2011 peak, the price climbed 48%—very nice, but hardly parabolic, and less than a fifth of the 1970s runaway move.

No Global Phenomenon in 1980 (Next Time It Will Be)

 

In the 1970s, the “mania” was mostly a North American phenomenon. China and most of Asia didn’t participate. When inflation grips the world from all the money printing governments almost everywhere have engaged in, there will be a much greater demand for gold than in 1980.

When that day comes, there will be severe consequences for those who don’t have enough bullion. Not only will the price relentlessly move higher, but finding physical gold to buy may become very difficult.

Comparable Price Moves? So What?

 

The argument we started with is really the clincher. It doesn’t matter how today’s gold prices compare to those from prior bull markets; what matters are the factors likely to impact the price today. Are there reasons to own gold in the current environment—or not?

First, a comparison: Apple shares surged 112% in 2007. After such a run up, surely investors should’ve dumped it, right? Well, those who did likely regretted it, since it ended that year at $180 and trades over $590 today. In fact, even though it had already risen dramatically and in spite of it crashing with the market in 2008, there were plenty of solid reasons to buy the stock then, not the least of which was the introduction of the iPhone that year.

So should we sell gold because it rose 535% in a decade? As with the Apple example above, that’s not the right question.

There are, in fact, several more relevant questions for gold today:

• What will happen with the unprecedented amount of money that’s been printed around the world since 2008?

• Why are economies still sluggish after the biggest monetary experiment in history?

• Global debt and “unfunded mandates” are at never-before-seen levels; how can this conceivably be paid off?

• Interest rates are at historically low levels—what happens when they start to rise?

• Regardless of your political affiliation, do you trust that government leaders have the ability and willingness to do what’s necessary to restore the economy to health?

If these issues were absent, maybe we’d change our position on precious metals. But until the word “healthy” can honestly be used to describe the fiscal, monetary, and economic state of our global civilization, gold should be held as an essential wealth-protection asset.

Today’s volatile world is exactly the kind of circumstance gold is best for.

The message here is clear, my friends. Regardless of the measure, gold has not matched its 1980 peak. And the reasons to own it have not faded. Indeed, they have grown. Continue to accumulate.

Learn about the best ways to invest in gold—how and when to buy it, where to store it for maximum safety, and how to find the best gold stocks—in the free 2014 Gold Investor’s Guide.

The article Time to Admit That Gold Peaked in 2011? was originally published at Casey Research

Check out our Advanced Study on Trading the Opening Gap in Crude Oil CL

Is this a "Bearish Outside Reversal" in Natural Gas?

June Natural Gas (NG.M14.E) opened sharply higher in Sunday evenings session, but since the open prices plummeted to a 5 day low. The sell off confirmed a bearish outside reversal ahead of today's U.S. session. June Natural Gas futures remain under pressure from last week's EIA storage report that showed a larger than expected supply build of 82 bcf. Recent weather forecasts have been calling for warmer temperatures across the country which could limit the size of upcoming supply injections.

In recent weeks, we have been in a sideways trend in the June Natural Gas Market as the market decides on which direction it is headed next. The technical analysis in Natural Gas points to bearish in the near term, making way for a potential swing trading opportunity.

In today's trading session, I will be looking to sell June Natural Gas futures at 4.660, or a breach of the 20 Day Moving Average. This breach would confirm the outside reversal in today’s trading session. My first downside target would be 4.500, a recent area of support in the market, at which point I would roll stops to break even. If the 4.500 are is hit, then I would look at 4.380 as my next target, which would be support from the long term trendline. To mitigate risk on the trade, stop loss orders should be placed just above today’s trading range and rolled behind the trade accordingly.

See you in the market!
 Posted courtesy of James Leeney and our trading partners at INO.com



Subscribe to our Free Market Technical Analysis and Commentary

 

Commodities Market Recap and this Weeks Stops and Trading Numbers

Today our trading partner Michael Seery gives our readers a weekly recap of the Futures market. He has been a senior analyst for close to 15 years and has extensive knowledge of all of the commodity and option markets.....

Crude oil futures in the June contract finished up around $.35 this Friday afternoon in New York as prices were down about $2.00 for the trading week right near 4 week lows and I am neutral in this market currently and waiting for a better trend to develop as supplies are at 85 year highs here in the United States which is a bearish factor however you also have problems in the Ukrainian region which is a bullish indicator so this market could remain choppy so wait for better chart structure to develop. Crude oil futures are trading below their 20 day moving average but above their 100 day moving average telling you that the trend is mixed so look for a better trending market to get involved with.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT

Get our "Advanced Crude Oil Study – 15 Minute Range"

Natural gas futures in the June contract finished lower for the 3rd consecutive trading session finishing higher by 3 points for the trading week to close around 4.69 as I’m recommending a long position in this contract placing my stop loss below the 10 day low which stands at 4.50 risking around 20 points or $500 per contract as the trend is still higher in my opinion as the risk reward situation is highly in your favor as we enter the demand season of summer.

Natural gas prices have been in a bull market for quite some time and if you read some of my previous blogs several months back when prices were in the low $3 I was recommending if you have deep pockets and a longer term horizon to buy natural gas as prices were extremely cheap due to the fact of large supplies, however we had an extremely cold winter which reduced supplies dramatically and I do think natural gas prices will be sharply higher from today’s level in the next year as prices have bottomed out in my opinion.

As a trader I focus on today and tomorrow only so when I can buy a natural gas contract and risk 1,500 I will take that trade even if I don’t believe the trade. Natural gas prices are trading above their 20 and 100 day moving average telling you that the trend is higher after we consolidated in the month March after the big run-up in early winter as prices seem to be resuming back up to the upside so play this market to the upside using my stop loss and proper risk management.
TREND: HIGHER
CHART STRUCTURE: OUTSTANDING

Fed Proof Your Portfolio

Gold prices had a volatile trading week basically finishing unchanged to settle around 1,298 in the June contract after having a tremendous reversal selling off down to 1,272 when the monthly unemployment number was released adding 280,000 jobs which is bullish the economy and bearish gold but then turned on a dime with the Ukrainian problems escalating sending gold finishing up $14 this Friday right near session highs as prices have been consolidating in recent weeks. I’ve been sitting on the sidelines in the gold market for quite some time as this market remains choppy and it might be bottoming at the current price levels as gold rallied $200 to start the year but now has given back over $100 so were at about the 50% retracement so if your bullish gold I would buy a futures contract at today’s price while placing my stop at the 10 day low which is also the 10 week low of 1,268 an ounce risking around $3,000 per contract. I’ve lived through many of these political escalations including one last August with Syria and they always seem to fizzle away so we will see if today’s rally will do the same but sit on the sidelines and see what develops. The one thing gold does have going for it is trading above its 20 and 100 day moving average which is telling you that the trend might be turning higher as prices could be bottoming out.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT

Why Are So Many Boomers Working Longer?

Silver futures are trading below their 20 and 100 day moving average as volatility has come back into this market in the last week as prices reversed sharply off of yesterday’s contract lows of 18.66 to go out this Friday afternoon at 19.47 an ounce and if you been reading any of my previous blogs for months I’ve been talking about the possibility of silver bottoming at the $19 level and if you have deep pockets and you’re a longer-term investor I’m recommending that you buy silver as I think prices are cheap. I am bullish silver not because of the Ukrainian problems but because of the fact that the commodity markets are in a bullish trend and silver will catch up eventually as this is a highly inflationary commodity with a lot of demand as silver is used in smart phones unlike gold which really has no purpose except for a flight to quality and jewelry. Prices reversed today because of the Ukrainian situation seems to be escalating and it sent prices sharply higher but the true breakout in this market is at 20.40 that’s where I really would be recommending to get long and if you are in a futures contract already I would be adding to my position if prices break that level as a spike bottom may have occurred in yesterday’s price action.
TREND: MIXED
CHART STRUCTURE: EXCELLENT

Here's our Critical Line in the Sand for Silver

Coffee futures settled last Friday at 207 while going out this afternoon in New York at 203 continuing its high volatility as prices are still trading above their 20 and 100 day moving average as the chart structure is starting to improve with the 10 day low currently standing at 194 which is about 1000 points away or $3,500 risk. As I’ve talked about in previous blogs coffee is a very large contract and should not be traded with a small trading account due to its high volatility as prices remain strong in my opinion so I’m sticking with my previous recommendation and just keep my stop at the 2 week low as will start to see some estimates on the Brazilian crop which should give us some short term price direction. Prices have basically stalled out in the low 200s in recent weeks as prices are still consolidating the giant move up we had earlier in the year as coffee prices are about 80% in the year 2014 as the drought in Brazil really took its toll so I remain bullish.
TREND: HIGHER
CHART STRUCTURE: IMPROVING


Want more....Silver, Corn, Sugar, Cocoa, Wheat....Just click here.

World Money Analyst: Europe....Cliff Ahead?

By Dirk Steinhoff
When Kevin Brekke, managing editor [of World Money Analyst], contacted me last week, I knew it was time again to survey the investment landscape. This month, I will focus on Europe and its decoupled financial and real economy markets.

Globally, the last two years were marked by booming stock exchanges of developed markets, disappointing bond markets, and devastation across the precious metals markets.

Since June 2012, the EURO STOXX 50 Index, Europe’s leading blue chip index for the Eurozone, has advanced by approximately 50% and outperformed even the S&P 500 and the MSCI World indices.

Over the last six months, European stock exchanges have seen a surprising change of leadership: The major stock market indices of the “weaker” countries, like Portugal, Spain, and Italy, have outperformed those considered stronger, like Germany. One of the top performers was a country that was and still remains in “bankruptcy” mode: Greece.

The question at this point is: Can these outstanding European stock market performances continue?

In our search for an answer, let’s start with a closer look at the economic conditions within the European Union (EU), where approximately 2/3 of total “exports” (internal and external) of the EU-28 are traded. And then let’s have a look at the economic setting of some major trading partners, such as the US and BRIC countries, which account for roughly 17% and 21%, respectively, of the external exports of the EU-28.
Although the EURO STOXX 50 Index has soared since June 2012, certain key measures of the underlying real economies paint a different picture.

To start, the GDP of the EU-28 is not really growing. In 2012, it contracted by 0.4% and grew by the smallest fraction of 0.1% in 2013. The GDP growth numbers for the countries in the euro area are even worse: -0.7% in 2012 and -0.4% in 2013. Whereas Germany’s GDP was up in 2013 by 0.5%, economic growth was down in Spain, Italy, and Greece by -1.2%, -1.8%, and -3.6%, respectively.

Real GDP Growth Rates 2002-2012
	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
EU	1.3	1.5	2.6	2.2	3.4	3.2	0.4	-4.5	2.0	1.6	-0.4
Germany	0.0	-0.4	1.2	0.7	3.7	3.3	1.1	-5.1	4.0	3.3	0.7
Spain	2.7	3.1	3.3	3.6	4.1	3.5	0.9	-3.8	-0.2	0.1	-1.6
France	0.9	0.9	2.5	1.8	2.5	2.3	-0.1	-3.1	1.7	2.0	0.0
Italy	0.5	0.0	1.7	0.9	2.2	1.7	-1.2	-5.5	1.7	0.5	-2.5
Portugal	0.8	-0.9	1.6	0.8	1.4	2.4	0.0	-2.9	1.9	-1.3	-3.2

The EU unemployment rate stood at 10.2% at the beginning of 2012 and stands at 12.1% today. That the European Union is anything but a homogenous body that moves in unison can be seen in the following chart:

Where Germany has a current unemployment rate of 5.2% and a youth (under 25) unemployment rate of 7.5%, the numbers for other countries are worrisome: Current unemployment in Spain is 26.7%, and 12.7% in Italy, with youth unemployment in Spain at an incredible 57.7%, and 41.6% in Italy. And don’t forget Greece, which is mired in a historically unparalleled economic depression where unemployment is 28% and youth unemployment is a shocking 61.4%. Keep in mind that all of these numbers are those officially released by bureaucratic agencies. The real numbers, as we know, would likely be even worse.

Recent EU industrial production numbers have shown some slight improvement. Nevertheless, industrial production has only managed to recover to its 2004 level, and remains way below its 2007 heights (see next graph).

Source: Eurostat

So let’s see: a shrinking GDP, high and rising unemployment, and stagnant production significantly below 2007 levels. Those are not the rosy ingredients of a booming economy (as indicated by the stock exchanges) but of one that is struggling.

Europe is not in growth mode.

This verdict is further supported by the export numbers for trade between EU countries, known as internal trade. In 2001, internal trade accounted for 67.9% of EU exports. Today, this share is down to 62.7%. In an attempt to compensate for sluggish European growth, EU companies had to develop other export markets, such as the US or the emerging markets.

Will these markets help rescue European companies?

Time to Taper Expectations

With regards to the U.S., two important developments are worth mentioning. The first key development, which will have severe consequences for the global economy, was brought to my attention by my friend Felix Zulauf, an internationally well-known investor and regular member of the Barron’s Roundtable for more than 20 years. Running ever-increasing deficits in its trade and current accounts for almost 30 years, the US thus provided an enormous amount of stimulus for foreign exporters. Since 2006, however, the US trade deficit has shrunk, with deteriorating trade data for many nations as a consequence.

The second key development is that the newly appointed head of the US Federal Reserve system, Janet Yellen, seems determined to continue the taper of its bond buying program. This fundamental shift in monetary policy could be questioned if the economic numbers for the US begin to show significant weakness. But in the meantime, the reduction of economic stimulus in the US should lead to a reduced appetite for European export goods.

The emerging markets had been seen, not too long ago, as the investment opportunity and alternative to the fiscal and debt crisis-stricken countries of the developed world. Today, on a nearly daily basis, you hear bad news about the situation and developments in the emerging countries: swaying stock markets, plunging currencies, company bankruptcies, corruption scandals, and even riots.

The emerging markets are dealing with the unintended consequences of the Quantitative Easing (including liquidity easing and credit easing) programs in the West. The increased liquidity spilled over into the emerging markets in the hunt for yield. This flow of capital into the emerging markets lowered capital costs, inflated asset prices like stocks and real estate, and boosted commodity prices. All that, and more, sparked the emerging markets boom.

Now, this process has reversed. The natural conclusion to exaggerated credit-driven growth, the tapering of QE programs, the shrinking US trade deficit, and lower commodity prices has been an outflow of capital from emerging markets, triggering lower asset prices and exchange rates. The attempt of some countries to defend their currencies by raising interest rates will only exert further pressure on their economies.

With weaker emerging market economies and currencies, there will be no big added demand for European exports. Revenues and profits for EU companies (measured in euros) will fall.

When Trends Collide

So, over the last two years we had opposing trends—booming European stock markets and weak underlying real economies. This conflicting mix was mainly fostered by easy money that drove down interest rates to historic low levels. Plowing money into stocks, despite the poor fundamentals, was the only solution for most investors.

At their current elevated levels European stock markets appear vulnerable, and it seems reasonable to doubt that we will see a continuation of booming stock markets. Of course, such a decoupling can continue for some time, but the longer it continues, the closer we will get to a correction of this anomaly. Either the real economy catches up to meet runaway stock prices, or stock prices come down to meet the poor economic reality. Or some combination of the two.

Because of the economic facts that I discussed above, in my view, we may be seeing just the beginning of a stronger correction in stock prices.

Dirk Steinhoff is chief investment officer of portfolio management (international clients) at the BFI Capital Group. Prior to joining BFI in 2007, Mr Steinhoff acted as an independent asset manager for over 15 years. He successfully founded and built two companies in the realm of infrastructure and real estate management. Mr Steinhoff holds a bachelor’s and master’s degree in civil engineering and business administration, magna cum laude, from the University of Technology in Berlin, Germany. 

---

Want to read more World Money Analyst articles like this? Subscribe to World Money Analyst today and learn how to look abroad for truly diverse opportunities that insulate you from domestic risk.

The article World Money Analyst: Europe: Cliff Ahead? was originally published at Mauldin Economics

Sign up for one of our Free Trading Webinars....Just Click Here!

Retirement Investing and Kitchen Table Economics

By Dennis Miller

What is it about retirement that causes confident, successful businessmen and women to lose that edge when they invest their own life savings? Many otherwise dynamic people become virtually impotent in the face of retirement investing. I have many friends who were very effective in business—folks who made sound decisions affecting how millions upon millions of dollars were spent. They would gather the facts, make a plan, and make the right call with confidence. Why was it so taxing for these same friends to manage their personal retirement accounts?


I’m a staunch advocate for gathering around the kitchen table to hash out problems and pass on life lessons. It’s where we gathered as a family to open our mail, pay the bills, and teach (and worry about) our children. I might even say that everything we needed to teach our family about economics, we taught at that kitchen table.

The secret is there is no secret. Investment gurus, stockbrokers, and talking heads like to use fancy words to dazzle. Many would have you believe their university or Wall Street pedigrees give them investing powers outside of your reach. Though many do have a little more knowledge or a little more experience, there is no need to be intimidated by the mystique.

Why? Because you already know most of what you need to know. The underlying principles for protecting and growing wealth during retirement are the same principles that allowed you to make and save that money in the first place.

When former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan would talk to Congress, many bright people would look at each other and think, “What the hell did he say?” If folks like Greenspan are so darn smart, why couldn’t they predict or prevent the Internet or real estate boom and bust? Why can’t they speak plainly? Don’t let anyone’s “elite” status overshadow your own common sense.

For the last few years, the Federal Reserve has been printing a 100 year supply of money annually. No one needs a PhD in economics to grasp the potential for high inflation. A little knowledge of history and a bit of common sense will tell you where we’re headed.

The key to using kitchen-table economics in retirement is to apply the same fact finding and research skills that made you successful in business. If you are uncomfortable making an investment decision, continue to educate yourself until you are. Of course, it’s sensible to take in input and ideas from experts. Just don’t get caught thinking they have any magic bullets.

If you ask four people to define “rich,” you would likely get four different answers. As we move into retirement, the definition tends to be more practical and realistic. “Rich” is enough money to live comfortably without countless hours of financial worry. It’s also a feeling of pride in the lifetime of work that built your nest egg and an appreciation for each and every trip you get around the sun.

How much do you have; how much do you need to earn to supplement your retirement income; and, how can you invest safely to reach that goal? Retirement investing is no more complicated than that. Simply put, it’s living within your means and protecting what you have.

If I could shout one piece of encouragement to retirees, it would be: Don’t let the fear of losing money immobilize you! Doing nothing can be just as dangerous as risking too much on a speculative or even downright foolish investment.

You may recall the old adage about the banker who never made a loan because he was afraid he might lose money. When the bank went out of business, he claimed it wasn’t his fault. After all, he never made a bad loan during his tenure.

To make your retirement money last, you have to take on some risk. There are, however, proven ways to limit that risk to manageable doses: sector, geographical, and political diversification, trailing stop losses—the list goes on. Good investors will lose money from time to time and learn from their mistakes. You just need to learn and make the right judgment call more often than not.

Don’t fret when others brag about how well they’re doing. Each year financial newsletters, mutual funds, and investment managers like to boast about how much money they’ve made their clients. Accountability is a good thing; we’re certainly proud of our own track record.

Though, when I see the list of top-performing funds ranked by the amount of annual return, my first questions are: How much did they risk to get there? Have they performed that well consistently? How much of those profits were eaten in fees?

Some mutual funds occasionally produce nice gains for their shareholders. I, however, would put my money on the well educated grandfather investing from his kitchen table in Iowa any day of the week. Why? A recent report indicated that 78% of all US domestic equity funds were outperformed by their benchmarks during the past three years. Large caps were worse, with 86% of falling short of their benchmarks.
Benchmarks are the indices in the sectors funds specialize in, respectively. In short, there are countless statistics indicating that you can invest just as well as a fund manager.

Those numbers should embolden you, not frighten you. I shared them to keep things in perspective. There is no magic wizardry, secret code, or special knowledge. All investors gather facts, make an evaluation, and then allocate some money based on what they think the future will bring. Those are skills that can be honed through education and experience by smart folks sitting at their kitchen tables or in their home offices.

I’m happy to report that the most frequent comment we receive is that our newsletter explains investments in plain English. There’s a reason for that: the investments well suited for a conservative investor’s retirement portfolio are not that complicated.

You can overcome retirement impotence. The best way to build your confidence is to learn ways to invest safely. We think teaching our premium subscribers about protective mechanisms like asset allocation, diversification, position limits, trailing stop losses, and internationalization is just as important as the individual picks in the Money Forever portfolio. If you’d like to learn more too, sign up for a no-risk trial subscription today by clicking here.

The article Kitchen Table Economics was originally published at Millers Money

How do you start trading crude oil? Right here with our "Intro to Crude Oil Video"....Just Click Here!