Saturday, May 16, 2009

What's the Difference?

Small investors need to recognize the differences between today's economics and the past. Identifying false indicators is key to successful investing and preservation of net worth.

The economy undergoes innovation to maintain control over the determinants (the indicators) of value and the distribution of the value. The innovation is largely driven by gamma risk--public sector intervention that affects value and its distribution (see the article, "Assessing the Value," and "Indications of Recovery" at griffithlighton.blogspot.com).

Gamma risk innovation occurs mainly to avoid and recapture payment of the retributive value (the distribution of capital that relieves liquidity crisis and reverses a deflationary trend). For example, the dip in the price of crude oil, oversold to nearly $30/bl signaled a recovery. The recent spike in the price, overbought over $50/bl reverses the trend.

The causal relationship between the price of the energy benchmark and the directional trend of the economy is quite clear. In spite of political measures to infuse liquidity to cause a sustained distribution that will stop and reverse the deflationary trend, the price of crude is being used to effect (command) the trend posteriori. The gamma risk is being effectively managed by the private sector.

As the retributive value is politically infused, energy prices increase, consolidating the infusion and reversing the trend. The portion of the capital infusion that does trickle down inches the economy toward recovery with a highly measured pace determined by the private sector.

The political element of the political economy can claim being in control to satisfy the demand for public action while, at the same time, the private sector commands the pace of recovery. The gamma risk has then been successfully managed and the distribution of value (the retributive value) legitimately conserved both publicly and privately. It is an ingenius application of the Hamiltonian model of power and political economy that maintains a strict class distinction as the result of the naturally endowed freedom of each individual to equally pursue life, liberty, and happiness without intervention of the sovereign (government).

Equal pursuit does not ensure equal results, thus the need to manage the retributive value and the gamma risk to the reward.

Self-determination of "The People" (the legal sovereign) obtains by a long and complex process of illusion in which both wealth and power are consolidated and conserved with the force and legitimacy of public authority.

The Hamiltonian model survives by innovative means. The main threat to its success is a progressive tax code that will not allow the capital infused to pluralize the economy to be consolidated and the elitist model conserved. Changing the model is not mere normative sentiment, but a descriptive analysis that accouchers the practical understanding of trend indicators and predictive utility.

Identifying what the difference is, the innovation, that gives meaning to the old adage, "past performance is no indication of future performance," and why economic data and trends are too often reported as "unexpected" by analysts, allows the small investor to manage the risk with the certainty of current means to ends that must predictably conform to old legitimacies (normative legal parameters).

Buying an oil futures contract is certainly not illegal, but if capital is allowed to consolidate and massively move into futures contracts, the effect determines the direction of the economy. The cause-effect relationship lacks the normative pluralistic legitimacy of free market economics. Technically correcting for it (the gamma risk) is where the innovation occurs and the predictive utility of the difference obtains.

Notice that the recent rise in the price of crude correlates with the "unexpected" trend back to deflation. It is a causal relationship that will keep the economy in a stagnant state (see the previous article, "Crude Indicator" at griffithlighton.blogspot.com).

Until there is a more progressive tax code in place, rising energy prices will falsely indicate a definitive SAR recovery point as long as it is a speculative means of directing it by reversing the trend.
A more progressive code will make pluralism more profitable. Energy prices will then rise on the health and wealth at the fundament (on demand and not command). The recovery phase will otherwise be weak and stagflationary with a strong deflationary tendency that will appear unexpectedly only by those that do not know the difference.

The precipitous drop in the price of crude late last year signaled the beginning of the recovery phase of the current business cycle. Recovery will be expressed with a positive, long and linear slope when the noise (the deflationary tendency: the short-term effect of the recovery indicator) is regressed from the oscillation.

At this point, falling energy prices is a means of controlling the depth and breadth of the deflationary trend and the amount of retributive value accrued, manageably spreading the gamma risk on that value over time. Each peak above or below $50/bl is a short term accumulation and distribution within a stagflationary macro model.

The cycle of boom and bust is innovated into more frequent, short-term events favorable for arbitrage and leverage finance that cultivates a take-the-money-and-run mentality. A more progressive tax code is a sure cure with a level of certainty that can be measured by the level of resistance to it if not the carefully deliberate ignorance of it.

2 comments:

  1. Hi GL ~ Excellent comments ~


    Re: Validity of FPE


    Markets are continuing to use speculative forward PE/raised earning estimates which are often proven to be false expectation as we can validate whether the Forward PE was reasonable.

    The following comparative cross-period PE vs FPE charts are showing that forward PE is often used as market manipulation since forward PE is mostly speculation. Even though forward PE and earning estimate is based on reasonable expectation, markets have proven that the forward PE was unreliable and overpriced.

    DOW 30 PE & Forward PE as of May 22, 2009 on page 2-3

    * Forward PE in average is showing around 15.

    * We have not seen warning signs based on the forward PE forecast during the last year.

    * Note that no earning for C, AA, and GM with forward PE of C 13 and AA 15.5 while GM is still negative.

    * JPM PE is over 60.

    * Forward PE is unrealistic just same as we didn't see a warning signal during the last year. Forward PE didn't warn us about the market sell-off which we have seen during the latter half of 2008.


    * The forward PE in July 25, 2008, as an example, didn't warn us for the sell-off in Sept-Nov 2008.

    * Forward PE and earning estimates are speculation which is often unrealistic and off-based expectations.

    * AIG FPE - the Forward PE for AIG in Jul 2008 was FPE 5.02 and the price at that time was in $30s.

    * C FPE - the Forward PE for C in Jul 2008 was FPE 8.11 and the price at that time was near $20.

    * BAC FPE - the Forward PE for BAC in Jul 2008 was FPE 8.96 and the price at that time was near $30.

    http://trend-signals.com/Analysis/090523fpe.htm

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Griffith,

    You might want to try

    http://feeds2.feedburner.com/

    Have a nice holiday

    ReplyDelete