Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

---

• American Airlines Went Bankrupt in November; Are Taxpayers on the Hook for Pension Benefits? What is the Equitable Solution?
• Jim Grant is Ron Paul's Pick to Head Fed, Gingrich's Pick to Study Return to Gold Standard; Grant Waits for Call from Mitt Romney; One Fundamental Mistake by Grant
• Deal Reached to Prevent Michigan Takeover of Detroit; Really? No, Not Really; What's Best for Bankrupt Detroit?
• Swarms of Mini-Drones to Forever Change Warfare; "Mr. President, We Have a Drone Gap"
• German Central Bank 228 Billion Euros in Debt Rescuing Europe; Bundesbank President Criticizes Merkel's Fiscal Pact, Says "No Grounds for Eurobonds"

American Airlines Went Bankrupt in November; Are Taxpayers on the Hook for Pension Benefits? What is the Equitable Solution? Posted: 02 Feb 2012 08:46 PM PST American Airlines filed for bankruptcy in November 2011. Here is the question at hand: Will Taxpayers Be On The Hook For American Airlines' Pensions? American Airlines needs $18.5 billion to cover its pension promises to current and former employees, but it has only set aside $8.3 billion. American Airlines is asking the bankruptcy court for permission to drop its pension plans. If the court allows that, the plans will be taken over by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp, a government agency that takes over pension plans for failed companies. The PBGC works like an insurance company. Firms that are backed by the PBGC pay premiums to the agency. Those premiums are supposed to pay for the agency's costs, so taxpayers don't have to pay. But in recent years the premiums haven't been enough — the agency's funding shortfall is currently $26 billion. The PBGC, for its part, is pushing back against American's request. Here's a statement from PBGC Director Josh Gotbaum: "Before American takes such a drastic action as killing the pension plans of 130,000 employees and retirees, it needs to show there is no better alternative. Thus far, they have failed to provide even the most basic information to decide that." If the PBGC does wind up on the hook for American Airlines pensions, it would be the largest single claim on the agency since it took over United Airlines pensions plans in 2005. Three Simple Questions Why should taxpayers be on the hook for private pension plans? Why are airlines bankrupt? What is the equitable solution? 1A. Clearly taxpayers should not be on the hook. 2A. Airlines are bankrupt because of over-regulation and absurd contracts and benefits negotiated with unions 3A. The key to answering question 3 is contained in the answer to question 2. Unions negotiated pension befits that bankrupted the companies. Thus it is unions who are largely responsible and it is unions, not taxpayers nor other corporations who should pay the price. Equitable Solution Details With the above guiding principles, the equitable solution is straight-forward. American Airlines needs $18.5 billion to cover its pension promises but it has only set aside $8.3 billion. That is a shortfall of $10.2 billion on $18.5 billion. In other words, a haircut of 55% on pension benefits will fix the problem. Interestingly, that is nearly the same percentage haircut as just as happened in the Central Falls, Rhode Island Bankruptcy. Some might protest that airlines should have been setting aside more money for their pensions all along. True enough. But the result would have been bankruptcy sooner, and it does not change who is to blame. It's best to look on the bright side. A 55% haircut is far less than is going to happen to Greece. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Jim Grant is Ron Paul's Pick to Head Fed, Gingrich's Pick to Study Return to Gold Standard; Grant Waits for Call from Mitt Romney; One Fundamental Mistake by Grant Posted: 02 Feb 2012 01:18 PM PST MarketWatch comments on the politics of Getting Back to the Gold Standard The legendary Wall Street writer, publisher of Grant's Interest Rate Observer, has been mentioned by two of the rivals for the Republican presidential nomination. Newt Gingrich said if elected president, he'd name Grant to help run a commission looking at a possible return to the gold standard. And Ron Paul said, if elected president, he'd go all-in and name Grant — one of Wall Street's best-known gold bugs — as the new chairman of the Federal Reserve. As Paul wants to abolish the Fed, it would doubtless be a temporary post. But Grant says he found the offer — which came out of the blue — very flattering. Alas, both men are trailing in the race to front-runner Mitt Romney. "Unfortunately, I haven't heard from Mr. Romney yet," joked Grant when I called on him in his offices down on Wall Street. "I'm sitting by the phone, I'm ready." He may have to wait some time. Romney, a conventional Wall Street figure, is unlikely to tap him anytime soon. Jim Grant is a paradox: A legendary, well-established figure on Wall Street who is not part of the Wall Street "establishment." He is a raging contrarian. A writer from a more elegant age, Grant is also a scathing critic of "too big to fail" banks and the whole Wall Street racket — with its privatized profits and socialized losses. He is best known these days — to Gingrich and Paul, among others — for his long-standing support for the gold standard. The world has moved in his direction. In 12 years, gold has risen from a derided relic trading at $250 an ounce to a hot investment at $1,750. Everywhere paper currency systems are under challenge. In 2008, the world discovered that you can't just manufacture endless wealth out of thin air, as the gold bugs had long argued, and it is still struggling with the realization. Many people will think of the gold standard as a relic of a bygone era, something as old-fashioned as bow-ties and stuffed animals. Grant, when we met, argued the reverse. He says paper currencies and our current monetary system are the ones that are out of date. "The anachronism is today's system," he says. We have a "command and control, top down" system whereby the Federal Reserve imposes an interest rate on society. The Fed, in other words, tells us what the price of money should be. It is, Grant says, oddly at odds with the modern age. "We live in a world of collaborative social networks" of the Internet and Facebook, of Wikipedia instead of the old World Book, and so on. And yet when it comes to the price of money, we wait for a committee that sits in private to tell us what it should be. I asked him, whimsically, what he'd do if he actually were to be named chairman of the Fed. He said he'd begin by communicating to the public why the present system was so wrong, and needed to be changed. He'd make the case for the gold standard. "I would then lay out a timeline for the conversion to a constitutional dollar, a dollar as envisaged by the Founding Fathers. " A dollar, he says, is supposed to be a fixed measure, "like a foot, or a pound," not something that can be redefined every few weeks by the Fed. In his ideal world, says Grant, he would lay out a three-year program to convert back to the gold standard, probably at around $2,500 per ounce of gold. He adds that he would take great care to avoid the notorious blunder made by Winston Churchill and the British back in 1925, when they went back on the gold standard at too high a price, and imposed brutal deflation on the economy. Alas, he admits, this would need an act of Congress. For good measure, he'd also push for a repeal of a 1935 New Deal law that protected bank investors from runs on their financial institutions. Before the law, he notes, if a bank got into trouble, the investors were on the hook to bail it out: After all, it was their bank. The same was true of the partners in a Wall Street brokerage. The system of taxpayer bailouts, like that of paper money, is a modern innovation. One Fundamental Mistake by Grant Grant is certainly correct about the need to return to constitutional money. He is also correct about killing the FDIC. However it is a mistake to think one can fix the price of gold. It cannot be done and should not be attempted. The irony is Grant correctly criticizes the Fed for fixing interest rates, then thinks he can correctly divine the correct price of gold at $2,500 an ounce. Only the free market can determine the price of gold and what gold buys. If the US went to a 100% gold-back dollar, with guaranteed convertibility of paper to ounces of gold, the price of gold would be much higher than $2,500 an ounce. Grant cites an error in 1925 in which the Bank of England set the price of gold too high. The opposite side of the coin is that if the price is set too low, is market participants will redeem all their paper dollars for gold, hoarding it. Simply put, the Fed does not know the correct interest rate and Grant does not know the correct price of gold. For the benefits of returning to a gold standard, please see Hugo Salinas Price and Michael Pettis on the Trade Imbalance Dilemma; Gold's Honest Discipline Revisited Premature Dollar Obituaries and Mainstream Economists' Monetary Insanity; Keynes-Inspired Great Depression; Lessons Not Learned Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Deal Reached to Prevent Michigan Takeover of Detroit; Really? No, Not Really; What's Best for Bankrupt Detroit? Posted: 02 Feb 2012 11:04 AM PST On January 29 Bloomberg reported Bing Races to Beat Michigan Deadline for Union Detroit Deal Democratic Mayor Dave Bing is racing to wrest concessions from 48 bargaining units to erase a $200 million deficit in the home of General Motors Co. and the cradle of the U.S. auto industry. Otherwise, the city of 714,000 dominated by Democrats may face a Republican-appointed manager with authority to sell assets and nullify contracts. State Treasurer Andy Dillon has said Detroit will run out of cash by May, and called for concessions by early February. This week, Bing began firing 1,000 of Detroit's 11,300 employees. The mayor also proposes a 10 percent cut in payments to vendors and doubling the 1 percent tax on corporations. Bing, 68, has said the city must trim annual employee benefit and pension costs, which have risen since 2001 to $35,000 per employee from $18,000. "We are meeting, not daily but more than weekly, and there are sidebar conversations every day," said Al Garrett, president of AFSCME Council 25, which represents about 3,000 employees. "I'm not sure an emergency manager would be any more Draconian than what the city itself is asking, but it's a real possibility." Deal Reached? Mayor Bing is taking his script straight from Greece where a deal has been "close" for days, weeks, and now months. Today's Bloomberg headline does not match the facts presented. Please consider Detroit Reaches Pact With City Unions to Avoid Takeover, Detroit News Says Mayor Dave Bing and a majority of city employee unions have reached tentative agreement on concessions aimed at avoiding a state takeover. "This agreement is the first meaningful step in achieving the necessary concessions and structural changes," Bing, 68, said via Twitter. The deal, but no details, was confirmed by Al Garrett, president of AFSCME Council 25. The agreement covers about 6,500 of the city's about 11,000 employees, not including police and firefighters who have resisted a demand for a 10 percent wage cut, he said. The city and unions must agree to concessions early this month to avoid state action, such as the appointment of an emergency manager with broad powers to cut spending, said state Treasurer Andy Dillon. Dillon is leading a review of city finances, after a preliminary review found it will run out of cash by May, and that it faces a $200 million operating deficit. Deal Reached? Really? No, Not Really According to mayor Bing we have an "agreement", albeit an agreement with no details, and without covering police or firefighters. What kind of deal is that? What's Best for Detroit? The best thing for Detroit would be if there is no deal, or the state rejects the deal. Unions are the problem and the solution is to get rid of them entirely. That will not happen under Bing, but it could happen in a state takeover. Bing is not interested in what's best for Detroit taxpayers nor is he interested is what's best for Detroit school children where shockingly only 25% graduate high schools. Rather, Bing is out to save as much of the status quo as he can, including his own job of course. Detroit Schools Bankrupt Flashback July 24,2009: The Wall Street Journal reports Detroit's Schools Are Going Bankrupt, Too Detroit is like many urban school districts—large, unwieldy and bureaucratic, with a powerful union that makes the system unable to adapt to changing circumstances and that until very recently had an indulgent political class that insulated it from reform. That insulation came in two forms. The first was neglect. Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick spent several years distracted by a scandal stemming from his affair with a staffer. He resigned last year, pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice, and was sentenced to four months in jail. Had he been an effective mayor, he might have also been a powerful advocate for students. The other insulating force was a conscious decision to wall off Detroit from charter schools. In 1993, Michigan's legislature made it difficult to create new charters in Detroit by declaring that only community colleges could authorize charters for primary and secondary schools in "First-Class Districts"—defined as those with more than 100,000 students. Detroit was the only First-Class District. In 2003 the state, under pressure from the Detroit Federation of Teachers, turned down a gift of $200 million from philanthropist Robert Thompson that would have established 15 charter schools in the city. Those charters are needed today. The net result has been a school system that's been coming apart as the teachers union has dug in its heels. In 2006, the union illegally went on strike, killing a plan to force teachers to take a pay cut to balance the system's books. Collective Bargaining has Morally and Fiscally Bankrupted Detroit Schools Read that again. Under pressure from the Teachers' Union, Detroit turned down $200 Million. That was in 2003 dollars. Wow. No doubt the union "did it for the kids". For more on the appalling behavior of Detroit's teachers' unions please see Detroit Public Schools (25% graduation rate) teachers unions opposing highly qualified volunteer teachers. It is time to kill collective bargaining for public unions, every one of them, and nation-wide, not just Detroit. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Swarms of Mini-Drones to Forever Change Warfare; "Mr. President, We Have a Drone Gap" Posted: 02 Feb 2012 09:34 AM PST As a temporary diversion from economic analysis, inquiring minds are watching an amazing video of swarming mini-drones. Information Dissemination says UAV Swarms Will Change Warfare Forever Global Guerrillas discusses Drones in the USA. Global Guerrillas also discusses the slippery slope of assassinations in DRONES and US Internal Security Previously, when thinking of killer drones people had images in mind of big extremely high flying predators such as this drone captured by Iran. Mini-drones flying in organized patterns are a completely different thing. Some of the ideas expressed in the above articles seem a bit far-fetched, such as swarms of tiny drones attacking ships. Could they carry enough explosives? According to Wikepedia, it would take at least 4 kg of plutonium (about 8.8 pounds) to build a nuclear weapon, and that does not count housing. Other explosives would seem to be more of a nuisance to a big ship than anything else. Thus thoughts of using mini-drones as explosive weapons may not be in the cards, but something substantially bigger, say a hundred pounds or so could conceivably work, and could easily be launched undetected a hundred miles out at sea, flying just above the water until it reached shore. Mr. President, We Have a Drone Gap Now, having wasted enormous amounts of money on researching and testing weapons shields in outer space, we can turn our thoughts to preparing for the invasion of swarms of yet to be announced killer nano-drones much smaller than the ones in that video. We also need to prepare for micro-drones capable of firing needle-sized poison darts, mini-drones such as one in the video able to fire a single bullet, and of course suitcase-sized drones capable of carrying nuclear bombs or firing a machine gun. Thus, the defense department obviously needs anti-drone drones at the nano-level, micro-level, mini-level, and suitcase-level. To paraphrase a general in the movie Dr. Strangelove regarding an alleged mineshaft gap, "Mr. President, we have a drone gap". If you have not seen the movie, please do. It is one of my all-time favorites. The only missing ingredient now is for some nutcase to champion a drone-defense program as the best way to save the economy. With those sarcastic thoughts out of the way, this drone-diversion is over. It's time to get back to discussing financial Armageddon. Addendum: Inquiring minds may wish to watch these big brother videos on drones being used or tested by police. Link if video does not play: UAV Spy Drones, Police to Tackle Privacy Issues Later Military drones being used by Local Police Link if video does not play: Military drones being used by Local Police German Microdrones, Your Eye in the Sky Link if video does not play: New German UAV -- microdrone Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

German Central Bank 228 Billion Euros in Debt Rescuing Europe; Bundesbank President Criticizes Merkel's Fiscal Pact, Says "No Grounds for Eurobonds" Posted: 02 Feb 2012 03:14 AM PST Both Angela Merkel and the Bundesbank are walking an extremely fine line of economic policies and treaty arrangements that appear to be in violation of policy statements made by the German Supreme Court regarding transfer unions. Moreover, the Bundesbank president is now in what amounts to an open Feud with Merkel. Bundesbank 228 Billion Euros in Debt Rescuing Europe Ambrose Evans-Pritchard at The Telegraph reports Bundesbank Sinks Deeper Into Debt Saving Europe The operations are part of the European Central Bank's 'TARGET2' network of automatic payments between the national central banks of the Euroland club. The Bundesbank has already provided €496bn (£413bn) to countries in trouble, chiefly Greece, Ireland, Italy and Spain. The Bundesbank - the dominant body in the euro system - used to keep a stock of €270bn of private securities (refinance credit) before the start of the financial crisis. This was depleted last year as it sold assets to meet growing demands on the TARGET2 scheme. Once the debt drama began to engulf the bigger economies, the Bundesbank was forced to borrow money to meet its obligations to offset capital flight, since it refused to sell its stash of gold. It now owes €228bn to German banks. "There are political limits to TARGET2 support. The reason why the ECB started printing money in December was to avoid pushing the Bundesbank deeper into debt," said Prof Westermann, referring to the ECB's provision of €489bn in cheap loans to banks for three years. David Marsh, author of books on both the Bundesbank and the euro, said the TARGET2 system has the effect of locking Germany ever deeper into monetary union. "The longer it goes on, the larger the cost of a eurozone break-up since these credits could be wiped out with horrendous losses. It is about time this was the focus of proper debate in the Bundestag, since the German taxpayers may have to pay for it," he said. Given that German taxpayers are indeed on the hook should something go wrong, I am surprised no one has issued a direct challenge to the German supreme court to stop the madness. The ECB may indeed have taken over "printing money" but German taxpayers are still liable for their large percentage share of any problems at the ECB. Target 2 Balances In Summit Time – Batten Down the Hatches Pater Tenebrarum posted a nice series of charts on Target 2 balances. click on any chart for sharper image Target 2 Germany Target 2 Netherlands Target 2 Finland Target 2 Spain Anyone see a problem here? If not, please consider this September 26 2011 post citing a ruling by the German Supreme Court: Germany's Top Judge Throws Major Monkey Wrench Into Leveraged EFSF Machinery, Demands New Constitution and Popular Referendum for Further Powers. German turmoil over EU bail-outs as top judge calls for referendum Germany's top judge has issued a blunt warning that no further fiscal powers may be surrendered to Europe without a new constitution and a popular referendum, vastly complicating plans to boost the EU's rescue machinery to €2 trillion (£1.7 trillion). Andreas Vosskuhle, head of the constitutional court, said politicians do not have the legal authority to sign away the birthright of the German people without their explicit consent. "The sovereignty of the German state is inviolate and anchored in perpetuity by basic law. It may not be abandoned by the legislature (even with its powers to amend the constitution)," he said. "There is little leeway left for giving up core powers to the EU. If one wants to go beyond this limit – which might be politically legitimate and desirable – then Germany must give itself a new constitution. A referendum would be necessary. This cannot be done without the people," he told newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine. Bundesbank President Criticizes Merkel's Fiscal Pact Clearly the Bundesbank is walking a very fine line, with huge problems of its own. It does not need additional problems caused by politicians. Thus its patience with Angela Merkel for stepping over the line has run out. Eurointelligence reports .... Bundesbank president Jens Weidmann last night criticized the fiscal pact Angela Merkel had forced upon her EU partners at last Monday's summit, Financial Times Deutschland reports. "The guidelines for the national fiscal rules leave considerable room of manouver and there is no control on a European level to check if they are really respected", Weidmann said in a speech. Merkel's former economic advisor also said he thought it was unlikely that the tougher rules of the new stability and growth pact would really be reinforced. "All that gives reason for some doubt", he concluded his assessment of the pact of which Merkel had said in her post summit press conference that its rapid adoption was "a masterpiece". The Bundesbank president went on to stress that the pact and the debates about control of national fiscal policies in the crisis countries showed that governments were not prepared to relinquish sovereignty to the European level. Therefor there were no grounds for a greater mutualization of debt or the introduction of eurobonds, Weidmann said. Political Zugzwang Merkel is under attack by members of her own political part and the president of the Bundesbank as well. As I said in Political Zugzwang, Merkel has no good options. Zugzwang is a term in chess. A player has to make a move but every move weakens the position. Pass is not an option. Merkel is in such a no-win position. Everything she does will put her under attack by someone. Doing nothing, is an option in politics but not chess. However, doing nothing also exposes Merkel to attack. Attacks Fly Check out this nonsense from former European Commission chief Jacques Delors who says Resistance to eurozone bailout boost 'scandalous' Former European Commission chief Jacques Delors on Sunday blasted the reluctance of eurozone countries like Germany to boost the size of the Greek bailout and create a system of eurobonds to facilitate lending. "It is scandalous. You cannot be a member of the euro cooperation and at the same time say no to elementary demands for solidarity with other members within the framework of existing agreements," the prominent European federalist said in an interview with Dagens Nyheter, Sweden's daily of reference. "It is a mistake of German Chancellor Angela Merkel to refuse to go along with such bonds," Delors said. Delors' Self-Serving Pomp What's scandalous if for political hacks like Delors to assume the Eurozone is worth saving, then tell everyone else how to go about it without taking into consideration any restraints others may have. I suggest the euro is not worth saving. For the sake of argument, however, let's assume the eurozone is worth saving, and start with a look at Merkel's options. Merkel's Predicament If Merkel proposed Eurobonds, her coalition would collapse and she would be ousted. Moreover, the German supreme court would certainly demand a referendum which would fail. The irony then, is if Merkel did what Delores asked, the eurozone would fly apart right here right now. If Merkel proposed significantly more bailout money, her coalition would also collapse and once again the proposal would be at risk of a challenge from the German supreme court. If Merkel does nothing, she takes heat from political dimwits like Delors and an entire gamut of other nanny-zone supporters. She also takes heat from her coalition. If Merkel steps up the pressure on Greece she hears it from her political opposition, from Delors, and from a whole host of parties representing a myriad of political views. That my friends is political zugzwang and that is precisely why she called for Greece to Cede Sovereignty to Eurozone "Budget Commissioner". Her proposal elevated the ire of Greeks as well as the likes of political hacks like Delors. However, blaming Merkel as Delors did is the height of arrogance. Not only is she at risk from from the German central bank, she absolutely cannot step over a line set by the supreme court. Thus, the option Merkel selected is the one that makes the most sense.  It was her least-worst option. It also bought her and the eurozone the most time. It is the only option that has any chance of working. I think the best thing for the Eurozone would be for Germany to exit. The irony is that would likely happen quickly if Merkel embarked down the path demanded by Jacques Delors. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

You are subscribed to email updates from Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610