4 Questions for Bruce Krasting

Bruce Krasting is a 25-year Wall St. vet, and runs one of my favorite finance/econ blogs.

#1 – If you were advising President Obama, what would your #1 economic action item be? Ignore political viability, if possible.

On a “big picture” basis I would set an agenda that was clearly moving in a direction of unwinding many/all of the emergency measures that were introduced in 08. For confidence to be restored we have to get the sense that the crisis is behind us. There is nothing that can be done “tomorrow” that can magically restore home values and reduce unemployment. Bernanke will try to save the day with QE-2, but it will not work any better than QE-1 did. A short term benefit at most. Same with fiscal policy. We can have another stimulus and borrow another $1 trillion. That would give us a few quarters more of anemic growth. But after that we would fall off the shelf when the life support ends. Our policies appear to me to be a bridge to no-where. A smooth ride till the end of the ramp and then a crash.

I think the Europeans have it closer to “right” than we do. They are moving in the direction that I think is better if one is looking out five years and asking, “What do we want to look like?” We are headed in the direction of Japan. We will have 1% growth (disaster) and debt to GDP of 150% (death).

But you asked a narrow question. What would I do?

I think we do need a stimulus. But it has to be different this time. We need the private sector to pick up the slack. So let’s give them a chance. I want a one year (18 months?) Payroll tax holiday. That tax is currently 12.4%. For 2011 that tax will be equal to about $700 billion. A very big drag. I want to cut SS by 60% during the holiday. I want the reduction to be shared by workers and and their employers. I would have a ratio of 60% for the workers and 40% for the employers. I want to put $400b in the hands of the private sector. This is money that does not even get collected by D.C.. So the government can’t spend it. I believe that the 150 million American workers will make the best use of that extra $240B. They will spend some of it and they will save some of it. The companies that get a break will also spend it. I would require that the savings that the employers get have to be re-invested.

BUT. This has to be PayGo. This can be done. I estimate that a ~4 year cut of SS benefits for those who are getting checks now but also have taxable income in excess of ~$200k PA is required. I call this the Bill Gates/Warren Buffet tax. These guys do not need the extra 1500 a month SS is paying them. This is a means test. It taxes wealth. I do not like that, but it is necessary. We have to raise revenue.

The percentage of people that this would affect is small. Therefore it is politically “sale-able”. It is a significant change of the rules of SS. But those changes would be temporary. To attempt to make this “fairer” I would give those that lost benefits a tax credit. That tax credit would be available to offset (dollar for dollar) any federal estate taxes that would be due at death. What would this do? It would put more “wealth” back into the hands of the next generation. Everything we do robs from the next generation. This has the opposite impact. It puts more in the hands of our children.

Some would object to this. But my guess is that Bill and Warren and many others who would lose benefits would be happy to do so. Those that would be impacted by this have a great stake in America. These are the ones who have the most to lose if we fall into a debt spiral or a depression. They are getting the money, but only after they are dead.

Trust me. A $400b reduction in PR taxes would be a very effective stimulus. It would work. The economy would stabilize. But it must be paid for. If we just borrow and spend we will have accomplished nothing. Making it PayGo would instill confidence.If confidence is restored markets will improve and interest rates will return to more normal levels. Those that lost SS benefits would rejoice at that result.

Disclosure: I would lose my benefits if this plan were implemented.

#2 – You have written extensively about Social Security. Which aspect of this program do you feel is most misunderstood? How much of a threat are baby-boomers to entitlement programs?

Hmmm. Most misunderstood? There are so many aspect of this that are misunderstood.

The $2,500,000,000 Trust Fund has to be at the top of the list. I typed all the zeros to show just how big the number is. $2.5 Trillion. Hard to think of.

Some say there is no money or assets in the TF. That it was robbed by some prior administration. Many refer to it as a ponzi scheme. Just a fictional accounting scam.

Those on the extreme other side look at this as massive pile of AAA Treasury bonds that will mature and be available to pay scheduled benefits for the next 25 years or so. They think that SS is sound and nothing need be done about it.

Both of these views are wrong in my opinion. The bonds in the TF will be paid on time. They are legally just as sound as those held by the Chinese central bank. We exclude these debts when evaluating our current Debt/GDP ratios.  We are doing ourselves a disservice, this is real money that is owed.

But to honor these debts means that the Debt Held By the Public will increase $ for $. That can’t and will not happen. Yes there are real assets, and no they can’t be used without a (my word) disastrous consequence to the bond market. There is a limit to what can be sold. I think we are dangerously close to that limit today. Adding in another 2.5t will make us lose our AAA and our financing cost will go up. We will become Greece.

On the Boomers. They have been the problem for decades. This demographic bulge is probably our most significant medium term challenge. When the boomers were born they created a housing boom. That has not stopped until 2007. 2008 is the first year of the boomers getting to 65 folks. That is not a coincidence. The mcmansions, second and third homes are coming up for sale now. The boomers are downsizing. This will go on for many years.

While the boomers did pay a lot of taxes and funded the surpluses in SS they are now going to start costing us big time. The aging of our population is accelerating. We still have a decade to peak.

If the economy were growing by 4-5% we could afford this transition. But that is the least likely thing to happen. Because of the boomers, we will be lucky to grow at 1.5%. Should that be the case the boomers will sink the economy.

Resources are are scarce. Allocations will have to be made. It will not be pretty. We have the risk of “age warfare”. We may be faced with the choice, “Who do we protect?” The health and education of people 25 and younger, or the health and well being of those over 80. If we are faced with triage we will have to support the former over the latter.

Socially, we may be looking at a bad end for the boomers.

I am a boomer.

#3 – Reports of under-funded pensions at corporate, state, and federal levels are widespread. Are you concerned?

Not my area of expertise.  I read the reports as you do. I am certain they are right. We are on a train wreck with this. The problem is that there was an assumption about how quickly assets would grow (8%) and and how big future contributions will be. Both are wrong. The lines are crossing in public and private PFs all over the country.

Cuts will have to be made. But these were promises that were made in ink, so it will not be easy. To a very significant extent this is another boomer problem. I will repeat from above:

Socially, we may be looking at a bad end for the boomers.

#4 – Could you briefly sum up your thoughts on U.S. equities?

Briefly? What a tough assignment.

There are today some excellent investment opportunities in the capital markets. That will be the case every day for the next ten years. But I don’t know what they are and if I did I would not share them. Those that “share” are just selling their book. I am convinced of one thing:

THE “BUY AND HOLD” IS DEAD. DEAD. DEAD….

Thanks to Bruce for taking the time. He’s one of the more level-headed and knowledgeable finance bloggers out there, and has the real-world experience many of us lack.

Random market thoughts

  • Bought more GOOG this week, it is really really cheap here. I wrote a bull-case article for Wealth Daily on Tues.
  • Re-shorted BP today @ $32.50 with a stop @ $36. Still holding some pure gamble 2011/12 LEAP puts at multiple strikes ($2.50 to $29).
  • Bought XOM this week, partially as a pair to the BP short, but mostly cause it looks cheap and I needed more energy.
  • Trimmed AAPL to near the bone, used proceeds to buy GOOG. Recent developments in China may look bad for Google, but I think they’ll be worse for Apple in the long run (labor costs set to skyrocket).
  • Trimmed PGJ (domestic-driven Chinese ETF) a bit. Nothing against this China really, just finding other options more attractive and taking some profits.
  • Bought Acergy (ACGY), a Norwegian offshore drilling services firm. Among other things, ACGY are some of the guys who run those ROVs hovering around BP’s Macondo well. Co. just merged with Subsea 7, which should work out well for both parties.

Anyone else got ideas? This market is obnoxious.

Current Rally in Perspective

The chart store gives us the gem of a chart below. At the 55 week mark, the current move ranks #27 out of 4,327 rallies since 1929.

Hat tip BR.

TradeKing Review

TradeKing’s $4.95 trade fees have attracted a lot of attention in the e-brokerage world, allowing them to steal customers away from competitors. Compare their pricing to $9.99+ at Etrade and Ameritrade, and it’s easy to see why.

Fees and Pricing

Say you make 100 trades per year. Switching to TradeKing would save you $500/year, assuming you pay $9.99 today. That’s $500 more to put to work in the markets every year, money that will compound and grow over time. Investors who trade more often will see even bigger savings, of course.

Follow this link to

Pricing Comparison:

As you can see, trading is much cheaper on TradeKing. Their $4.95 price includes broker-assisted trades. I’ve had to use this option before with Etrade, when my internet went down. It wasn’t cheap. If you get in a similar spot, it’s nice that TK doesn’t charge a ton.

Official TradeKing site here:

Options pricing: Trades are $4.95  plus $.65 per contract. Compare that to $9.99 and $.75 per contract with Etrade. Big difference, especially when you trade volume.

Savings like that can make a huge difference for options traders. TK also offers options price calculators and options screening tools, allowing you to search for options that are fundamentally cheap (or expensive) depending on whether you’re looking to buy or sell.

Mutual Funds: Transaction fees also beat rivals by around 25%. They’re $14.99 vs. $19.99. These small savings make a big difference over time, especially in retirement accounts where your portfolio has decades to grow.

TradeKing is the cheapest online broker I know of. I can’t see fees going much lower, as TK’smargins must already be thin when you factor in exchange fees and business overhead. I assume TradeKing must be relying on some more advanced offerings to pad margins.

Drawback – Not Ideal For OTC/Penny Stocks

One potential drawback is TradeKing’s $.01/share fee on shares priced less than $1. For dumpster-divers and OTC gurus, this is not ideal. Those fees can really add up over time, when you’re doing transactions with 100k or even 1m shares at a time.

Charts and Technical Analysis Review

TradeKing offers some nice technical analysis tools, which are powered by Recognia. You can set up email alerts to notify you when breakouts or other events are happening.

Charting is pretty standard. Pattern-recognition, tons of TA indicators you can add, comparisons, etc. Like research, most investors can find the charts they need for free these days.

Margin Rates

TradeKing’s margin rates are slightly cheaper than the competition, at 6.5%. That compares to ETrade’s 7.99% and TD Ameritrade’s 9.00%.

Research Reports

TK offers MarketGrader fundamental research reports to clients. These look solid, but don’t boast the same big-name appeal that firms Etrade pay for. But to be honest, I find very little value in reports from companies like Standard and Poors.

All these ratings agencies have fee-based relationships with the companies they cover, and that creates a bias problem. I was an Etrade customer for 8 years, and found most of those reports to be useless. Better information can be found for free on the web, in my experience. I’d rather not pay for pricey research that I never use.

Customer Service

TradeKing offers phone support with minimal wait times. They also offer online chat and email support. I made a call to test their claims, and got a real person on the line within a minute. Not bad, considering how cheap the trades are. They also received Smart Money’s #1 in Customer Service award in 2008.

Tax Reporting

Review Conclusion:

Controlling costs today is more important than ever. TradeKing is a good way for investors and traders alike to cut their brokerage fees in half. I’m currently in the process of moving my old Etrade account to them. I make about 120 buys a year, so this should save me $600 in the next 12 months alone. Not bad.

Here’s a link to signup:

Feel free to share your own review of TradeKing in the comment section. I’d like to hear all experiences, good and bad.

Reviewing My Picks and Investment Theses

Occasionally I write about what I’m buying on this site, so thought it would be worthwhile to review my picks and the reasoning behind them.

Note: Performance %’s are from date of post to 03/05/2010. In many cases, I stopped out earlier on losers or sold winners. I provide additional color when possible.

The Bad

Long Gamestop (GME) @ $24.50: Down 26%. A devious value trap, which still looks cheap to me at 7x trailing P/E. But it gets no respect on Wall St. Everyone’s too busy speculating on BAC and the TBTF mafia, over-leveraged REITs, etc. I am still long GME, but it’ll probably be even cheaper soon.

Short Simon Properties (SPG) @ $51: Down 54%. I’ve traded around this position a few times, with total losses of around 25% on it. I didn’t cover my initial $51 short in the $20′s when I had the chance. Got greedy, figuring they were headed to zero just like GGP. Then the Fed/Gov stepped in with more liquidity than God, and raising capital became much easier, especially for a well-connected REIT like SPG.

Expensive lesson learned, covered that $51 short in the high 40′s. I’ve re-shorted since and been stopped out for losses a few times (and am still stubbornly watching for signs that the inevitable and long-awaited CRE shoe is finally dropping).

Long GRZZX (May 2009): Down 49%. I sold this short-only mutual fund for a 20% loss, as the bull market picked up steam and bailout bonanza really got under way. Theory was that it would be nice to have a diversified basket of shorts for the inevitable double dip.

At that point the market had already bounced 28% from lows. The world was ending, and this little bounce was dead-cat in nature. Boy was I early. Not to mention generally naive about the effects of government-mandated recklessness. A few days after I bought GRZZX in May, I wrote The Deck is Stacked Against Shorts. A month earlier I warned bears that More Bailouts and Inflation Loom. Shoulda been bargain hunting or speculating on garbage stocks.

The Good

Long AAPL @ $81 (Jan 2009): Trades at $218.95: Up 168%: Apple was a lesson in how to trade the next panic. When that crazy growth-monster momo stock you lust after (but don’t want to pay a premium for) crashes, BUY IT. Other examples: VMW, GOOG.

I bought more AAPL at prices ranging from $81-$93, and ended up with quite a large position (for me). If I remember correctly,  Apple was trading at around a 16x P/E with screaming earnings growth and $30/share in cash. There really were some bargains there for a while… Still holding around 1/3, house money. Sold the rest from $160-$194. The stock is a beast, no telling where it’ll stop. But I am skeptical of the iPad’s prospects.

Long Palladium bullion @ $250/ounce: (June ’09) Now trading at $470/ounce – Up 88% (June 2009). I think my thesis was solid, and appears to be playing out. Back then I said, “It may prove to be a good hedge against an inflation-fueled recovery. As the world continues to print money in an attempt to stimulate industry/consumers, demand and inflation could increase dramatically. This may in turn cause commodities like palladium to rise significantly, as governments artificially goose the markets.”

Long PGJ @ $13: (Jan ’09) Trades at $24.21 – Up 82%. My favorite China ETF. It has minimal financial sector exposure (unlike FXI, where the index is 40%+ finance stocks). Still holding most of this.

Long TRAMX @ $5.66: (May ’09) Now trades at $6.99 – Up 23%. Africa and Middle East mutual fund. If traditional emerging markets aren’t risky enough for you, you can buy this fund and get exposure to these politically volatile but fast-growing markets. Still holding.

Long EKWAX @ $45: (Jan 2009) Now trades at $73.29 – Up 58%: I love this gold fund. These guys know how to pick winners in the mining space. It’s up 602% over the last 10 years. I agree with George Soros here. Gold may eventually be a bubble, but it’s one that I want in on. And it has not come close to peaking yet, with countries around the world engaged in a currency race to the bottom. Still own it.

Morals of the Story, Lessons Learned

Overall I’m happy with the picks I’ve posted here. They either crushed it or bombed, not much in the middle.

I didn’t have enough long equity exposure in ’09, but the ones I did have made up for it. I also own gold and silver, which have done well.

One of the biggest lessons for me was the difficulty of shorting in an environment like this. The Fed has been pumping liquidity into the system like mad, and outcomes depend more on the actions of a few questionably-motivated creatures (who have abysmal track records) than actual fundamentals. Nothing to be done about that though, from an investing perspective anyway.

In hindsight, it was clearly better to bargain-hunt and speculate than short in ’09. My best gains of the year were pure speculation or value plays. I didn’t publish two of the big ones here, but I did post them on my old Motley Fool CAPS blog. One was CROX at $1.20 (trades at $7.49 today, 524% gain).  The other was Men’s Wearhouse @ $11.20 (trades at $25.17 today).

Reading hedge fund veterans like Bill Fleckenstein was quite helpful. I’ve been subscribing to his service for a while, and he closed his short-only fund near the market bottom, after a hugely profitable year. His short positions have been burnt by Fed Chairmen past, so he knew what effect all that Fed liquidity would have. He told readers he’d rather be in precious metals and cheap stocks than short.

I learned a lot about government intervention in general, and its impact on markets. Next time it looks like the world is ending, everyone should buy horrible pig stocks that will  benefit from the Feds’ clumsy/corrupt attempts to “stabilize the markets”, AKA bail out politically-connected mega-firms.

Bearish Sentiment At 22-Year Low

The latest sentiment reading by Investors Intelligence shows a disturbing trend. Only 15.6% of financial newsletters are currently bearish on equities.

Last time the bearish indicator was this low was April 1987. A few months later (Black Monday) the DJIA dropped 21% in a single day:

In other words – when everything seems peachy — watch out. Turns out that peaks and troughs in investor sentiment are pretty good contra-indicators. Bullish sentiment tends to peak as bubbles are near their top, and vice versa.

From the revamped and newly Bloombergesque Business Week:

Pessimism about U.S. stocks among newsletter writers fell to the lowest level since April 1987, six months before the equity market crash known as Black Monday, following the biggest rally in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index in seven decades.

The proportion of bearish publications among about 140 tracked by Investors Intelligence fell to 15.6 percent yesterday from 16.7 percent a week earlier. Sentiment has improved since October 2008, when the financial crisis drove the figure to a 14-year high of 54.4 percent. After plunging 38 percent in 2008, the S&P 500 has risen 25 percent this year.

This is not to say markets wont’ run again in 2010. Irrational bull markets can last much longer than you’d think. The momentum they build up is impossible to fight. Gotta wait for that to break before getting seriously short. Example – After the bearish-sentiment index bottomed in 1987, the market rallied another 14% before crashing.

Smart investors like Bill Fleckenstein have been highlighting the credit bubble since the mid-1990′s. And today markets are more irrational than ever. Government intervention is preventing market cycles from proceeding like never before.

Industries like housing, banking, and commercial real estate have become completely dependent on government support. Their future (and that of our currency) depend on whether our leaders will extend or end this support. It’s a ludicrous, manipulated market.

So far America’s leaders have repeatedly demonstrated that they have zero tolerance for economic pain. Their support for the financial markets seems unlimited, no matter the long-term cost. I don’t see that changing without something drastic hapenning – another huge round of bailouts, a shift in the political landscape, or something else.

Earnings Distorted, Bloated

Earnings, as officially reported, are less and less reflective of a company’s real income.. Today’s earnings are nothing less than a rosy version of what they “should of been, had not X happened.” X represents the bad stuff that constantly happens to businesses, but currently they are treated as one-time events, no matter how many quarters-in-a-row they occur. One-time transactions that are profitable, however, are included in “headline” earning numbers, of course.

This is a different breed of bubble. On top of creative income interpretation, asset losses are being swept under the rug with an impressive array of accounting gimmicks. Changes to rules that govern loan valuation, and the continued allowance of off-balance-sheet vehicles are examples.

Related:

Page 1 of 212