The Daily Reckoning Presents... March 31, 2015 Archives | Unsubscribe "Let Them Eat Cash" The return of Ben S. Bernanke... $470 billion that might've been for savers… IF they weren't busy being screwed... Then, the great "money illusion" performed in your neighborhood by the talent and grace of a central banker near you... You Will Never Look at the $100 Bill the Same Way Again Why is Ben Franklin on the $100 bill? Sure, he was a statesman, inventor, diplomat and one of the most important American Founding Fathers. But there's an untold story that could change everything you think you know about this Founding Father. Click here to see the details. Baltimore, Maryland March 31, 2015 Dear Reader, Even in retirement, Ben Bernanke has decided to punish savers. Introducing... Seeing how the domain www.itsnotmyfault.org was already taken, the former Fed chairman hung his digital shingle outside the Brookings Institution website. He is their, ahem, "distinguished fellow in residence with the economic studies program," after all. A sweet gig, judging by the title. "Now that I'm a civilian again," wrote Bernanke in his inaugural post yesterday, "I can once more comment on economic and financial issues without my words being put under the microscope by Fed watchers." We hear his snickering up the beltway here in Baltimore. Soon after, he posted his first self-absolutio -- er, blog. The topic? A question we've been wondering for five years now: Why are interest rates so low? "I am sure there are millions of people like me," writes one of our dear readers, "who used to earn over $10,000 in interest and now get approximately zero. Someone on a YouTube video estimated $9 trillion stolen from the middle class by the Fed since 2008. That estimate is probably high, but it shows the criminal intent." In point of fact, that number is high. A report out last Thursday claimed that between 2008-2013, the Fed's zero interest rate policy, or ZIRP, cost savers $470 billion in foregone interest income. Yet here's Ben Bernanke, writing at his new blog: "A similarly confused criticism often heard is that the Fed is somehow distorting financial markets and investment decisions by keeping interest rates 'artificially low.' Contrary to what sometimes seems to be alleged, the Fed cannot somehow withdraw and leave interest rates to be determined by 'the markets.' "The Fed's actions determine the money supply and thus short-term interest rates; it has no choice but to set the short-term interest rate somewhere. So where should that be? "The best strategy for the Fed I can think of is to set rates at a level consistent with the healthy operation of the economy over the medium term, that is, at the (today, low) equilibrium rate. There is absolutely nothing artificial about that!" Hah! "But why couldn't the Fed let interest rates be determined by the market, Ben?" we wanted to ask in reply. Alas, when we tried… this popped up: Bummer. Even more curious is how could he… Janet Yellen… or any other conehead with an economics Ph.D. know what a "level consistent with the healthy operation of the economy over the medium term" is? We'll answer our own question -- they can't! There's no need to speculate… Bernanke twisted open the money spigot in 2008 with two goals in mind: Provide cheap credit so that consumers and businesses would borrow, spend and stimulate the economy… Send stock, bond and real estate prices higher so people would feel richer and spend more... $3 trillion in new printed money later, is there any evidence QE, ZIRP or NIRP worked? Was it worth running over savers? Has the economy been operating healthily over the medium term (we're guessing six years counts as medium term…)? No, of course not. But who cares? Let them eat cash... Regards, Peter Coyne The Daily Reckoning P.S. We read in this morning's Daily Pfennig that Janet Yellen explicitly admitted that cash isn't a good store of value. We have to work with what she'll give us, so we'll take that as a mea culpa. Consider that as a preface to Jim Rickards' essay on the "money illusion," below... P.P.S. In other news… It's been a year and one month since Bernanke cashed his book advance check for $1 million. Last we heard, he's still working on it. Ben, if you're reading this… a few title suggestions, if we might: Money Doesn't Grow on Trees, Duh!… That's What I Said, but What I Meant Was… or The Exit Is This Way. Breaking: 3 out of 4 grocery items deadly. Can you spot which ones? A leading medical school proved they increase cancer ninefold, but the government ignores it. There's a good chance these foods are in your fridge right now. Click here to find out. The Daily Reckoning Presents... Jim Rickards issues an important warning, below... ****************************** Beware the Money Illusion by Jim Rickards A money illusion sounds like something a prestidigitator performs by pulling $100 bills from a hat shown to be empty moments before. In fact, money illusion is a longstanding concept in economics that has enormous significance for you if you're a saver, investor or entrepreneur. Money illusion is a trick, but it is not one performed on stage. It is a ruse performed by central banks that can distort the economy and destroy your wealth. The money illusion is a tendency of individuals to confuse real and nominal prices. It boils down to the fact that people ignore inflation when deciding if they are better off. Examples are everywhere. Assume you are a building engineer working for a property management company making $100,000 per year. You get a 2% raise, so now you are making $102,000 per year. Most people would say they are better off after the raise. But if inflation is 3%, the $102,000 salary is worth only $98,940 in purchasing power relative to where you started. You got a $2,000 raise in nominal terms but you suffered a $1,060 pay cut in real terms. Most people would say you're better off because of the raise, but you're actually worse off because you've lost purchasing power. The difference between your perception and reality is money illusion. The impact of money illusion is not limited to wages and prices. It can apply to any cash flow including dividends and interest. It can apply to the asset prices of stocks and bonds. Any nominal increase has to be adjusted for inflation in order to see past the money illusion. The impact of money illusion is not limited to wages and prices. The concept of money illusion as a subject of economic study and policy is not new. Irving Fisher, one of the most famous economists of the 20th century, wrote a book called The Money Illusion in 1928. The idea of money illusion can be traced back to Richard Cantillon's Essay on Economic Theory of 1730, although Cantillon did not use that exact phrase. Economists argue that money illusion does not exist. Instead, they say, you make decisions based upon "rational expectations." That means once you perceive inflation or expect it in future, you will discount the value of your money and invest or spend it according to its expected intrinsic value. Like much of modern economics, this view works better in the classroom than in the real world. Experiments by behaviorists show that people think a 2% cut in wages with no change in the price level is "unfair." Meanwhile, they think a 2% raise with 4% inflation is "fair." In fact, the two outcomes are economically identical in terms of purchasing power. The fact, however, that people prefer a raise over a pay cut while ignoring inflation is the essence of money illusion. The importance of money illusion goes far beyond academics and social science experiments. Central bankers use money illusion to transfer wealth from you — a saver and investor — to debtors. They do this when the economy isn't growing because there's too much debt. Central bankers try to use inflation to reduce the real value of the debt to give debtors some relief in the hope that they might spend more and help the economy get moving again. The importance of money illusion goes far beyond academics and social science experiments. Of course, this form of relief comes at the expense of savers and investors like you who see the value of your assets decline. Again a simple example makes the point. Assume a debtor bought a $250,000 home in 2007 with a $50,000 down payment and a $200,000 mortgage with a low teaser rate. Today, the home is worth $190,000, a 24% decline in value, but the mortgage is still $200,000 because the teaser rate did not provide for amortization. This homeowner is "underwater" -- the value of his home is worth less than the mortgage he's paying -- and he's slashed his spending in response. In this scenario, assume there is another individual, a saver, with no mortgage and $100,000 in the bank who receives no interest under the Fed's zero interest rate policy. Suppose a politician came along who proposed that the government confiscate $15,000 from the saver to be handed to the debtor to pay down his mortgage. Now the saver has only $85,000 in the bank, but the debtor has a $190,000 house with a $185,000 mortgage, bringing the debtor's home above water and a giving him a brighter outlook. The saver is worse off and the debtor is better off, each because of the $15,000 transfer payment. Americans would consider this kind of confiscation to be grossly unfair, and the politician would be run out of town on a rail. Now assume the same scenario, except this time, the Federal Reserve engineers 3% inflation for five years, for a total of 15% inflation. The saver still has $100,000 in the bank, but it is worth only $85,000 in purchasing power due to inflation. The borrower would still owe $200,000 on the mortgage, but the debt burden would be only $170,000 in real terms after inflation. Better yet, the house value might rise by $28,000 if it keeps pace with inflation, making the house worth $218,000 and giving the debtor positive home equity again. BIG Announcement From Silicon Valley's Most Secretive Company This company's market-leading software is already the backbone of cybersecurity for the U.S. Defense Department, the CIA, FBI, and a growing list of financial companies like JP Morgan. And that's only the beginning... This company is growing at an insane pace, raising $500 million in funding last year -- and is currently valued at roughly $15 billion. Still, I bet not one out of 100 people on Wall Street knows anything about it. This company hasn't even gone public. But when it does, it could explode...making much more money for early investors than anyone on the public market. Click here to discover this company. The two cases are economically the same. In the first case, the wealth transfer is achieved by confiscation, and in the second case, the wealth transfer is achieved by inflation. The saver is worse off and the debtor is better off in both cases. But confiscation is politically unacceptable, while inflation of 3% per year is barely noticed. In effect, inflation is a hidden tax used to transfer wealth from savers to debtors without causing the political headaches of a real tax increase. Why do central banks such as the Fed pursue money illusion policies? The answer involves another academic theory that doesn't work in the real world. The Fed believes that underwater debtors are from a lower income tier than savers and investors. This means the debtors have what's called higher marginal propensity to consume, or MPC. The MPC measures how much you spend out of each dollar of wealth you gain. If you gained $1,000 and decided to spend $50, your MPC would be 5%. If you spent nothing after getting an additional $1,000, your MPC would be 0%. Academic theory says that poorer debtors have a higher MPC than wealthier savers. This means that if inflation transfers wealth from savers to debtors, total spending will go up because the debtors will spend more of the money than the savers would have. This is said to benefit debtors and savers, because debtors gain from the increased wealth, while savers gain from more overall spending in the form of jobs, business revenues and stock prices. This makes inflation a win-win. Academic theory says that poorer debtors have a higher MPC than wealthier savers. This theory sounds neat and tidy, but it has serious flaws. By lumping all savers together, the theory fails to distinguish between truly wealthy savers and middle-class savers. It may be true that if you're a very wealthy saver, you have a low MPC. If you are spending a certain amount on vacations and fine wine and the Fed steals some of your savings through inflation, you will probably spend just as much on vacations and fine wine. But if you're part of the middle class who is struggling with an unemployed spouse, children's tuition, elderly parents' health care and higher property taxes, your savings and investments are a lifeline you cannot afford to lose. If your savings are eroded by inflation, the pain is real and your spending may be cut. There is no free lunch. Cantillon in the 1730s suggested an even more insidious flaw in the central bank's reasoning. He said that inflation does not move uniformly through an economy. It moves with lags, something Milton Friedman also said in the 1970s. Inflation, according to Cantillon, moves in concentric circles from a small core of people to an ever widening group of affected individuals. Think of the way ripples spread out when you drop a pebble in a pond. Cantillon said that the rich and powerful are in the inner circle and see the inflation first. This gives them time to prepare. The middle class are in the outer circles and see the inflation last. They are the victims of lost purchasing power. This Cantillon Effect may explain why wealthy investors such as Warren Buffett are buying hard assets like railroads, oil and natural gas that will retain value when inflation hits. Official measures of inflation are low today but those in the inner circle already see it coming first, just as Cantillon suggested. Official measures of inflation are low today but those in the inner circle already see it coming first. If you're in the wider circles, however, you may stay in conventional stock and bond portfolios too long and will see the value of your assets diluted by inflation. You may not realize it until it's too late, either. The money illusion deceives everyday investors. Money illusion has four stages. In stage one, the groundwork for inflation is laid by central banks but is not yet apparent to most investors. This is the "feel good" stage where people are counting their nominal gains but don't see through the illusion. Stage two is when inflation becomes more obvious. Investors still value their nominal gains and assume inflation is temporary and the central banks "have it under control." Stage three is when inflation begins to run away and central banks lose control. Now the illusion wears off. Savings and other fixed-income cash flows such as insurance, annuities and retirement checks rapidly lose value. If you own hard assets prior to stage three, you'll be spared. But if you don't, it will be too late because the prices of hard assets will gap up before the money illusion wears off. Finally, stage four can take one of two paths. The first path is hyperinflation, such as Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe. In that case, all paper money and cash flows are destroyed and a new currency arises from the ashes of the old. The alternative is shock therapy of the kind Paul Volcker imposed in 1980. In that case, interest rates are hiked as high as 20% to kill inflation… but nearly kill the economy in the process. Right now, we are in late stage one, getting closer to stage two. Inflation is here in small doses and people barely notice. Savings are being slowly confiscated by inflation, but investors are still comforted by asset bubbles in stocks and real estate. Be nimble and begin to buy some inflation insurance in the form of hard assets before the Stage Three super-spike puts the price of those assets out of reach. Regards, Jim Rickards for The Daily Reckoning P.S. I've just released a new book called The Big Drop. It wasn't a book I was intending to write. But it warns of a few critical dangers that every American should begin preparing for right now. Here's the catch -- this book is not available for sale. Not anywhere in the world. Not online through Amazon. And not in any brick-and-mortar bookstore. Instead, I'm on a nationwide campaign to spread the book far and wide... for free. Because every American deserves to know the truth about the imminent dangers facing their wealth. I've gone ahead and reserved a free copy of my new book in your name. It's on hold, waiting for your response. I just need your permission (and a valid U.S. postal address) to drop it in the mail. Click here to fill out your address and contact info. If you accept the terms, the book will arrive at your doorstep in just a week or two. James G. Rickards is the editor of Strategic Intelligence, the newest newsletter from Agora Financial. He is an American lawyer, economist, and investment banker with 35 years of experience working in capital markets on Wall Street. He is the author of The New York Times bestsellers Currency Wars and The Death of Money. Jim also serves as Chief Economist for West Shore Group. BE SURE TO ADD dr@dailyreckoning.com to your address book. Additional Articles & Commentary: Join the conversation! Follow us on social media: The Daily Reckoning is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. By submitting your email address, you consent to Agora Financial delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Daily Reckoning e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Daily Reckoning, feel free to click here. Please read our Privacy Statement. For any further comments or concerns please email us at dr@dailyreckoning.com. If you are you having trouble receiving your Daily Reckoning subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by whitelisting the Daily Reckoning. © 2015 Agora Financial, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized investment advice. We expressly forbid our writers from having a financial interest in any security they personally recommend to our readers. All of our employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.