Real Assets are Historically Cheap Right Now. Here’s One Example.

Real Assets are Historically Cheap Right Now. Here’s One Example.

Notes From the Field By James Hickman / Simon Black / Sovereign Man October 2, 2024

The “green energy” revolution is one of the biggest fantasies of today.

For example, they tell us that fossil fuels are going away, that the gasoline powered internal combustion engine is a thing of the past, and that everyone wants to drive an electric vehicle (EV).

Clearly, that’s why over 90% of consumers still choose gas powered vehicles...

So the government instead has to step in to mandate electric vehicle use, attempting to force manufactures to sell 50% electric vehicles by 2030.

They conveniently ignore the fact that the American electric grid cannot handle that kind of power demand.

And if the $1 billion per EV charging station Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg is spending from the trillion-dollar infrastructure bill is any indication, we’re not going to get there in six years.

The “green energy” revolution is one of the biggest fantasies of today.

 Meanwhile, auto manufacturers are actually scaling back EV production as demand slows and infrastructure gaps remain vast.

Governments and activists may wish it were otherwise, but fossil fuels are not going away for decades. Yet, the belief that they are has led to massive misallocations of capital into renewables.

We’ve talked about this in regards to oil, natural gas, and the uranium required for nuclear power. All of these energy assets have been ignored by investors, or demonized by activists and governments, despite remaining absolutely critical.

And the same thing is true of the metals necessary to build traditional internal combustion engines.

Mining companies are obsessed with finding more metals like nickel and cobalt for the “green energy” revolution. Meanwhile, the specific niche metals required for gas vehicles have been neglected.

I’m talking about platinum group metals (PGMs). These include six metals—platinum, palladium, rhodium, iridium, ruthenium, and osmium—renowned for their high melting points and corrosion resistance.

Over 80% of palladium and 90% of rhodium is used in gas vehicle emissions control systems to convert toxic gases into less harmful substances.

And it seems investors have believed the lies of the climate fanatics, assuming that demand for these metals will drop precipitously as everyone flocks to electric vehicles.

This ignores, first, the actual reality that people still prefer gas vehicles.

Second, the fact that hybrid-electric vehicles are actually the most popular alternative to gas-only vehicles.

And while the EPA-regulation wants everyone to drive electric vehicles, hybrids also satisfy its 50% mandate.

Already, hybrid vehicles account for about 25% of vehicle sales in the US. And they actually use more PGMs per vehicle than traditional combustion engine cars.

But the supply of PGMs is shrinking.

South Africa, the dominant producer of platinum and rhodium, has struggled with power shortages, labor strikes, and declining investment in its mining sector. Russia, another major player, faces sanctions and geopolitical uncertainty that disrupt its palladium production.

With these two countries controlling the vast majority of global supply, the market is heading for significant deficits in the coming years. The numbers are already telling: in 2023 and 2024, the platinum, palladium, and rhodium markets all ran deficits, as in, more was consumed than produced.

Despite this looming shortage, prices for PGMs have plummeted.

Palladium is down 66% from its 2022 highs, and rhodium has crashed by 80% since 2021. This collapse in prices has put major PGM producers on the back foot, forcing them to cut jobs, and even shut down some operations.

Investors, spooked by the drop, are shorting palladium at record levels, convinced that the future belongs to EVs. But they’re missing the bigger picture.

False narratives like these are one reason why many real assets are historically cheap right now.

Real assets are physical, tangible goods like certain commodities and natural resources which have intrinsic value tied to real world uses. This includes energy assets like oil and uranium, productive technology, and fertile farmland.

It also includes critical minerals and metals, like the ones we have been discussing.

Unlike financial assets and paper money, they cannot be conjured out of thin air by central banks and government. Which is why they protect wealth against inflation.

And the type of conditions present in the PGM market is a classic example of finding a historically undervalued real asset.

A crucial, critical resource with limited supply? Check.

A burgeoning shortage, with no movement in the markets to remedy it? Check.

A historically low price for the critical resource? Check.

That’s why this summer we wrote to subscribers of our investment research service, The 4th Pillar, about a company which mines PGMs.

But rather than traditional mining, it extracts these metals from tailings— the waste left over from other mining operations.

And that means it actually gets its source material delivered to it for free...

This company has a deal with a chrome miner for the exclusive right to process the chrome mine tailings. It gives back the recovered chrome, and keeps all the extracted PGMs for itself.

It’s a symbiotic relationship with no money exchanged, no profit share, and no royalty owed.

This low-cost, efficient business model has allowed the company to stay profitable even as PGM prices have cratered.

With a rock-solid balance sheet and minimal debt, it is perfectly positioned to weather the current downturn and capitalize when the market inevitably turns.

But again, this isn’t just the story of PGMs and vehicle markets.

Everywhere you look, real assets are historically cheap.

Often these same conditions exist— the market for a critical resource has been ignored by investors, or demonized by activists, cutting into supply, while demand stays steady, or even grows.

While frustrating, these lies create enormous opportunity. The best way to capitalize is by investing in critical real asset companies at historic lows. As inflation rises and markets correct, those who invest now stand to benefit immensely.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/real-assets-are-historically-cheap-right-now-heres-one-example-151519/

PS-
The 4th Pillar is our highest tier investment research service that focuses entirely on undervalued real asset businesses. Based on our track record, an annual membership is well worth the $1,995 cost.
If you’re interested in subscribing you can do so here.

So What About Silver?

So What About Silver? 

Notes From the Field by James Hickman / Simon Black

September 25, 2024  In the 6th century BC, during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, Babylon flourished as a center of power, culture, and commerce.

We know this because the Babylonians were exceptional record keepers. And they chiseled everything down onto cuneiform tablets, many of which have survived through today.

Sadly the tablets aren't tabloids. They don't contain any juicy gossip or colorful stories of ancient times.

But they do offer extremely detailed-- though often boring and mundane-- records of everyday economic transactions, legal contracts, and administrative activities.

Just like future historians centuries from now should easily be able to see this evening's closing stock prices for Apple and Tesla, we can also read about daily grain prices in ancient Babylon.

One important tablet from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II highlights the interchangeability of gold and silver in Babylonian commerce. It records a transaction where 5 shekels of silver were considered equivalent to half a shekel of gold.

(The shekel was an ancient unit of weight approximately equal to 8.33 grams.)

This exchange rate implies a silver-to-gold ratio of 10:1.

The formal establishment of fixed exchange rates between gold and silver took a significant leap under Darius the Great in the mid-6th century BC.

Ruling over the vast Achaemenid Empire, Darius borrowed the concept of minting coins from the Lydians and introduced a bimetallic standard. He decreed that one gold "daric" coin was equivalent to 20 silver coins, creating one of the first examples of an official, fixed silver-to-gold ratio.

Over time, the ratio fluctuated due to advancements in mining techniques and changes in supply and demand. And by the era of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC, the ratio had shifted to 13:1.

Similarly, in ancient Rome, Julius Caesar established a 12:1 ratio.

Even in the early history of the United States, The Coinage Act of 1792 legally defined the US dollar in terms of specific weights of gold and silver—1.604 grams of pure gold or 24.1 grams of pure silver—establishing a ratio of approximately 15:1.

Of course, today, the silver-to-gold ratio is whatever the market decides. Ever since the dollar was removed from the gold standard more than five decades ago, the market ratio between silver and gold has ranged from about 25:1 all the way up to 120:1. Right now it is about 85:1.

Many people have an idea about where this ratio should be. Some people think that it will inevitably fall back to 50:1 which would price silver at around $53 per ounce.

Silver could certainly rise to $53 and far beyond. But not because of some preordained ratio.

Remember, there is no fixed rule or law regulating the silver/gold ratio. There's nothing stopping it from rising to 500:1.

And frankly I think it's likely the ratio could rise much higher from its current 85:1.

Just think about the catalysts that could drive both gold and silver prices much higher.

Gold prices over the past few years have been pushed to all-time highs by central banks. And as I've argued, this is a pretty clear sign that they anticipate moving on from the US dollar as the global reserve currency.

As the US national debt continues to explode higher and the federal government appears increasingly dysfunctional, it's becoming likely that the US dollar's global dominance could come to an end within the next several years.

What does the post-dollar global financial system look like? What will the next reserve currency be? No one knows.

And that's why central banks are buying gold. Because they have $8 TRILLION worth of US dollar reserves that they need to convert into something of value.

Gold, for now, represents that value. So central banks are buying it by the metric ton.

But (with minor exception) central banks do not buy silver. The market is too small, making it extremely difficult to invest billions of dollars all at once.

Silver prices are influenced more by industrial demand... and investor speculation. I'll come back to that.

I've said before that a Kamala victory will likely spell the end for the dollar's reign. This is a person who thinks that inflation is caused by "greed" and whose answer to every problem is more government spending.

The Harris deficits and inflation will likely be the proverbial straw that breaks the dollar's back. And the consequent surge in central bank gold purchases could easily send the silver/gold ratio soaring past 200 or more.

Again, while 200 is far beyond the historical average, there's no reason why it can't be even higher. Historical averages are merely data points, not firm rules.

It's far more important to pay attention to price catalysts. And gold has a major catalyst in central bank purchases.

That doesn’t mean the price of silver won’t rise. In fact, a climbing gold price alone is very like to increase the price of silver, simply because investors will speculate that it will rise.

This becomes somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy; investors buy an asset believing that it will rise. That increased demand causes the price to rise, encouraging more investors to buy.

We've seen this type of feverish speculation with plenty of asset classes in the past-- including silver more than a decade ago.

But in the end, if there aren't real demand fundamentals to support the price, the speculative mania always fades.

Bottom line, gold has clear demand from central banks that could send the price to absurd levels. Silver does not share the same catalyst.

Silver prices could absolutely skyrocket. But this would be far more likely due to temporary speculation (and those buyers tend to be finicky and sell quickly) rather than from true long-term industrial or investor demand.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

PS-  If you value this type of financial and political analysis, this is just a taste of what you’ll get with Schiff Sovereign: Premium. At just $9/month, it’s packed with incredible insights, including both Plan B strategies and compelling investment research. It’s a highly educational, month-by-month guide that is designed to help you navigate the world from a position of strength, both personally and financially.

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/so-what-about-silver-151499/

And, Right On Cue, Gold Hits Another All Time High...

And, Right On Cue, Gold Hits Another All Time High...

Notes From The Fuield By James Hickman (Simon Black)  September 16, 2024

This is an anomaly we haven’t seen before.

Gold just hit yet another all-time high. But what’s strange is that, if you look at gold’s supply and demand fundamentals, the price should almost be falling. Not rising.

I’ll explain—

On the supply side, gold production is actually increasing slightly. The largest miner in the world, Newmont Mining, produced nearly 30% more gold in the first half of 2024 compared to 2023. And across the entire industry (according to the World Gold Council), global gold mining output is up slightly over 2023.

So much for shrinking supply.

But what about demand? Well, this is usually broken down into four main segments.

The first and (by far) largest segment of demand is jewelry. But global jewelry demand is down.

Signet Jewelers (which owns major jewelry brands like Kay, Zales, Jared, Blue Nile, and many others) has reported an 8.5% drop in revenue so far in 2024 versus 2023. Meanwhile China’s Gold Association reported a 27% decline in gold jewelry purchases in the first half of 2024.

Even on the high-end side, LVHM’s jewelry division (which includes the luxury brand Tiffany’s) also reported a 5.1% sales decline due to “an uncertain economic and geopolitical environment. . .”

So overall jewelry worldwide (which is THE biggest component of gold demand) is down. Worldwide.

The next segment which drives gold demand is investment demand, i.e. individual investors who buy bars and coins... but most often invest via Exchange-Traded Funds.

Well, the largest ETFs in North America (GLD and IAU, which comprise 80% of the market) are DOWN for the year, meaning they have been net SELLERS of gold, rather than buyers. Even in the month of August, these two combined for a big fat whopping 1.7 metric tons of net purchases, roughly $200 million.

That’s nowhere near enough to move the gold price.

Meanwhile, across the Pacific, all of Asia’s gold ETFs COMBINED only purchased a net 0.3 metric tons (i.e. $30 million) last month. Again, this is simply not enough demand to move the gold price.

And so far for the year, worldwide, gold ETF holdings are DOWN by about 44 metric tons.

The third category of gold demand is industrial use. You might already know, for example, that there’s about 50mg of gold in your mobile phone thanks to gold’s unique chemical properties as an electrical conductor.

So mobile phone producers (along with certain medical device manufacturers and a handful of other industries) also buy gold. It’s pretty small demand, though— industrial and technology use only makes up about 10% of global gold demand.

That said, it’s worth pointing out that iPhone sales (which is a good proxy for global mobile phone production) are down substantially, from a peak of $48 billion in Q1/2021 to just $39 billion in its most recent quarter.

So, to summarize, jewelry demand is flat or down. Investment demand for gold is flat or down. Industrial demand is too small to matter, but even that is down. Meanwhile, supply is rising.

Rising supply and falling demand? It seems like gold prices should be falling right now. And yet gold just reached yet another record high. What gives?

Well, as we’ve said before, the answer is central banks.

Poland is a great example; despite being a relatively small country, it bought 19 metric tons of gold last quarter alone. And it plans to buy at least another 125 tons in the future. That’s a lot of gold.

This is a trend taking place worldwide; central banks including China, Turkey, Qatar, India, Czech Republic, etc. have loaded up on gold this year. And in the second quarter of 2024, central banks purchased 183 metric tons of gold... which is far more than usual.

Central banks typically buy small amounts of gold, i.e. a few metric tons here and there. But over the past two years, they’ve been buying gold like crazy.

It’s pretty obvious why. They’re concerned about the world, and they’re concerned about the fate of the US dollar and US government finances.

Think about it— central banks around the world own TRILLIONS of dollars worth of US government bonds, i.e. US dollar foreign reserves. And they’re obviously worried.

Congress and the White House run outrageous budget deficits every year. The federal government’s dysfunction is a constant national embarrassment. The US national debt is set to soar by AT LEAST $22 trillion over the next decade. And inflation is far from being solved.

Foreign central banks know this. And they realize that, in a few years time, their trillions of US dollar reserves will be worth a lot less.

So they’re trying to do something about it now. And that means trading at least SOME of their dollars for gold... hence the feverish central bank gold purchases, and the all-time record high in the gold price.

We’ve already suggested that gold could easily go much higher... especially if Kamala wins. I think that’s easily a $10,000 gold price, which would suggest only a small percentage of US dollar foreign reserves invested in gold.

That doesn’t mean the gold price can’t fall in the meantime. Gold prices have been rising for so long, and, realistically, nothing goes up or down in a straight, uninterrupted line.

Some central banks will continue buying gold irrespective of its price. Others will be more conservative and try to play the market. Singapore’s central bank, for example, actually sold a bit of gold recently and are probably hoping for a pullback in prices to buy more.

But over the longer term, gold is still an extremely sensible hedge with a lot of upside.

Having said that, the real value we see right now is in gold miners.

Look at Newmont mining— and, this is not a recommendation, but just an example. Newmont is the world’s largest gold miner, i.e. more than 80% of its revenue is essentially gold.

Gold is at an all-time high, yet Newmont’s stock price is about 40% below its record high from a few years ago.

Sure, it’s a much more complicated story; you have to consider gross margins and mining costs and country risk, etc. But the larger point is that gold stocks (especially relative to gold) are very cheap right now... especially when you consider where gold could be a few years from now.

To your freedom,  James Hickman   Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/and-right-on-cue-gold-hits-another-all-time-high-151422/

Shocker: Iran Funneling Billions Through the Fed’s System

Shocker: Iran Funneling Billions Through the Fed’s System 

Notes From The Field By James Hickman / Simon Black September 9, 2024

When I was a kid growing up in the 1980s, my father used to go every summer for two weeks of military training as part of his commitment to the US Army Reserve. And whenever he flew home, we would always meet him at the airport.

But back then, my mom, sister, and I could all go straight through security and sit at the gate to wait for him. In fact that was normal all the way through the late 1990s.

Then, of course, everything changed after 9/11. The federal government took over airport security overnight, and for the past 23 years, we’ve been taking off our shoes, getting fondled by federal agents, and throwing away our liquids.

More than two decades after 9/11, most of these TSA Security rules (the majority of which have been adopted around the world) seem pretty stupid.

Does anyone honestly believe that a 3.4 ounce tube of toothpaste is OK, but 3.5 ounces of toothpaste is a security threat?

This is the kind of idiotic logic behind rules that add unnecessary inconvenience to people’s lives, without providing any discernible benefit.

The same thing applies to those ridiculous consent forms on countless websites across the Internet. Whenever we visit a site we are now forced to “accept cookies”, thanks to a law passed by the European Union’s most idiotic politicians.

They somehow think we are all safer and better off... and that our privacy is protected.

Except that our privacy isn’t protected. Mark Zuckerberg and the Google guys are still following us around the Internet watching everything we do and click. Not to mention the governments themselves grab our biometric and personal data, shove it all in a database, then leave it prone to breach by hackers.

But hey, at least we have those cookie notifications to keep our data safe, right?

It’s just another stupid rule that inconveniences people, without providing any discernible benefit.

Banking is another great example.

Some people aren’t old enough to remember, but it used to be a pretty simple process to open a bank account. You’d show up, sign some papers, and you were done. Now, we’re all threatened with imprisonment, forced to fill out a million forms, and every single transaction is scrutinized under anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism regulations.

The entire apparatus treats you like a criminal suspect rather than a valued customer. And for what?

Turns out, it’s all for nothing.

Laws like FATCA, CRS, and the USA PATRIOT Act were supposedly passed, at least in part, to cut off terrorist groups from the global financial system.

But all the regulators missed that Iran– a nation that has been blacklisted by the global financial system– sent hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas– a blacklisted terrorist organization. And then Hamas used that money to kill innocent Israeli civilians on October 7, 2023.

The US President himself agreed to release $6 billion in frozen funds to Iran for the release of a handful of Americans. So again, what exactly is the point of all that scrutiny in the financial system?

My mother has to jump through all sorts of hoops to prove that she’s not a criminal just to withdraw some cash from her bank account. But Hamas and the Taliban get hundreds of millions of dollars funneled to them, through the US banking system.

The latest example is actually the Iraqi banking system—which was set up in part by the US government after the 2003 invasion.

Top officials from the US Department of Treasury and Federal Reserve helped oversee the establishment of Iraq’s new financial system, including the anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering controls.

Well, big shocker, it turns out that the Iraqi banking system, i.e. the system set up by the US government, was used by terrorist groups to send money to Iran and to Hamas.

So once again, what exactly is the point of all these rules and regulations, which inconvenience regular, law-abiding citizens... if groups like Hamas can still receive ample funding through the system. It’s obvious the rules are pointless and have no real benefit.

The irony here is that so many governments around the world, including the US, are some of the most outspoken opponents of cryptocurrency.

The US Treasury Department hates crypto. They say it is dangerous to have an unregulated monetary system where terrorists and drug cartels can operate with total privacy.

Yet the very banking system that THEY established is what’s actually funding terrorists.

Everyone else has to suffer through daily friction and be treated like criminals, just to send some money from point A to point B; withdrawing $5,000 in cash brings a bureaucratic shock and awe.

And this is one of the biggest reasons why I think it makes sense to own crypto.

I’m not a crypto fanatic by any means. I don’t own it to speculate on the price. And most days, in fact, I don’t know the price of Bitcoin or Ether. Nor do I care.

To me there’s no point in trading dollars for crypto, only hoping to trade crypto back for more dollars. The larger idea is that crypto represents a way to send and receive funds outside of a system run by incompetent bureaucrats who constantly make our lives worse.

It’s similar to my belief that gold makes sense as a long-term store of value; I don’t trust the Federal Reserve or the White House with preserving the value of my savings. Gold is a great way to do so... without having to rely on the financial system.

With both crypto and gold, there’s no intermediary or incompetent bureaucrat standing in the middle.

That’s also why I’ve never seen any reason to debate which is better, gold vs crypto. There’s no reason to argue about it.

Both serve a useful purpose, and both are worth considering as part of any sensible Plan B.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

PS-

If you’re not sure how to get started on a Plan B, check out Schiff Sovereign: it’s packed with incredible insights, including both Plan B strategies and compelling investment research. It’s a highly educational, month-by-month guide that is designed to help you navigate the world from a position of strength, both personally and financially.

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/shocker-iran-funneling-billions-through-the-feds-system-151402/

Three Key Trends That Will Shape the Future of America

Three Key Trends That Will Shape the Future of America

Notes From the Field By James Hickman / Simon Black  September 5, 2024

You wouldn’t be especially impressed by someone’s insight if they told you that the world today is full of turmoil. That’s obvious— from wars and cultural clashes to cost of living crises and a pervasive sense of negativity.

More impressive is that William Strauss and Neil Howe predicted that the 2020’s would be like this nearly three decades ago in their 1997 book, The Fourth Turning.

According to their theory, societies move through cycles approximately 80-100 years long, with each cycle divided into four distinct "turnings." These phases mirror the seasons, with the Fourth Turning representing the harsh winter—a period of upheaval and transformation.

Strauss and Howe predicted that the next Fourth Turning would begin in the mid-2000s, ignited by a crisis that would set the stage for significant societal change.

The 2008 global financial crisis marked the beginning of this period. Since then, governments and central banks have been in a constant state of crisis management, employing measures like low interest rates and increased government spending to prop up the faltering system.

Today, as Strauss and Howe foresaw, this phase is characterized by a collapse of trust in institutions that have dominated since the start of the current cycle, just after World War II.

From the media, to government bodies like the justice system and Federal Reserve, to global organizations like the UN and IMF, these institutions are increasingly viewed as ineffective, obsolete, or downright harmful.

Historically, Fourth Turnings are marked by intense turbulence, often culminating in major conflicts or transformative events, such as the Great Depression leading to World War II, or in the cycle before that, the American Civil War.

While history doesn’t have to repeat itself exactly, the growing dissatisfaction across the developed world is palpable. Issues like healthcare costs, immigration, and rising inequality fuel a sense that society is no longer functioning as it should.

This widespread discontent often leads to political upheaval. As voters lose faith in current leaders, new political movements and parties gain traction.

But none of these ‘saviors’ are going to win by promising to cut spending.

Until their hand is absolutely forced, politicians will continue to borrow and spend as much as they can in a desperate attempt to cling to power. But to be fair, the public is also to blame— they largely demand it.

As Howe writes in the sequel to the Fourth Turning which he published last year:

“Like addicts acquiring tolerance, policy-makers have backed themselves into a corner: The public braces itself for the dark hour when the Fed can no longer ease and Congress can no longer borrow no matter how badly the economy founders.”

This scenario highlights three key trends that are likely to shape the future:

1. Huge Deficit Spending

The US deficit reached nearly $2 trillion in 2023, a historic high outside of wartime or national emergency.

In theory there is no limit to the level the deficit can reach. After all, the US Government can issue the debt and the Federal Reserve can buy it all.

But the problems show up in the value of the US dollar. Not just against other currencies— other governments are devaluing their currencies in the same way. Instead, the value of what a dollar is worth, in terms of real goods and services that people need to buy, is diminished.

The Fed is acting right now as if the inflation problem is licked. But, given the trajectory of future deficit spending, we are really just in the opening stages of a larger, wider inflation problem.

2. Increasing Conflict

The intensity of global conflicts has escalated, particularly following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This has accelerated a shift away from global trade and cooperation, as countries prioritize securing their own supply chains and others try furiously to develop parallel financial systems that leave them less vulnerable to the whims of US foreign policy.

This retreat from global integration is likely to increase tensions and create further instability.

3. Potential Monetary Resets

All of this leads to the potential for a monetary reset— typical during a Fourth Turning. The value of the reserve currency is being continuously debased and its status as a reserve currency can leave others vulnerable to the imposition of sanctions or even confiscation of their assets. That’s not sustainable.

There are so many possible permutations of how this could all play out that it’s difficult to say exactly what a global financial reset would look like right now.

But it would almost certainly mean the loss of the dollar’s global reserve status.

That is exactly why we always advocate having a Plan B, a solid backup plan to provide great optionality in tumultuous times.

That’s why we started Schiff Sovereign: Premium, a highly educational, month-by-month guide that is designed to help you navigate the world from a position of strength, both personally and financially.

In Schiff Sovereign Premium, we focus on what we think will work well amidst all the uncertainty, regardless of the sequence of events that occur.

It includes both Plan B strategies (such as maintaining your freedom of movement, and legally reducing your tax bill), as well as compelling investment research.

Our investment thesis focuses on real assets— the world’s most critical, valuable, and useful resources, as well as the businesses which produce them.

Real assets are a beneficiary of the huge debasement of currency that we are seeing. And right now, with central banks across the world starting to cut interest rates again, we should see that trend accelerate.

Gold in particular has already responded to the impending injection of liquidity that lower interest rates will bring, reaching all time highs on multiple occasions this year.

Gold mining stocks, however, haven’t yet followed suit... but are primed to do so. (In July’s issue, we explained why, and released research on two well-positioned companies in the gold mining industry.)

Commodities are also a beneficiary of the unfortunate trend of increasing conflict across the world. Not only are war-time economies typically inflationary, they also require a huge amount of industrial commodities.

But the chronic underinvestment in commodity supply over the past decade has set the stage for potential shortages. As these issues come to the fore, both prices and investment in production are likely to rise— a great opportunity for investors.

But even if these trends don’t play out exactly as expected, investing in companies that control some of the world’s most valuable real assets—especially including critical energy resources like natural gas and uranium—has very little downside.

To your freedom,  James Hickman   Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/three-key-trends-that-will-shape-the-future-of-america-151390/

How Genghis Khan Is Driving Your Grocery Bill Higher

How Genghis Khan Is Driving Your Grocery Bill Higher

Notes From the Field By James Hickman / Simon Black August 27, 2024

Over eight hundred years ago, in what is now northwestern China, the Uyghur people— long before they were carted off to internment camps by the Communist Party— ruled their own independent kingdom, known as Qocho.

Then, in the year 1209, Genghis Khan sent diplomatic emissaries to Qocho. The message was clear: the Great Khan wanted to avoid a bloody military campaign, and he proposed a peace offering instead.

Genghis Khan’s deal was simple: the Uyghur people would keep their rulers, their infrastructure, their religion, and their customs. Their soldiers would live. Their buildings would not burn. Their women would not be touched. They would even be granted a high degree of autonomy.

And in exchange, they would provide the Mongol Empire with administrative support, as the Uyghurs were famously adept in governance and literacy.

The Uyghur ruler, recognizing the military strength of the Mongols and the benefits of an alliance, voluntarily accepted these terms, avoiding destruction.

Genghis Khan is generally known to history as a butcher and conqueror. But he was also a fairly skilled diplomat; he understood that it was far better to talk and settle matters peacefully than to go to war.

Through peaceful negotiation, lives could be spared, resources conserved, and vital economic assets preserved— not just for his own empire but also for the kingdoms he sought to absorb. This meant more tax revenue for him, and prosperity for everyone.

Fast forward to the present day, and Genghis’s namesake— Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan— has taken the opposite approach. She wants to go to war... which in our modern era means lawsuits. She has no interest in diplomacy, discussion, or compromise; she just wants to sue businesses and take them to court.

Bear in mind, the FTC was created in 1914, back when a handful of huge companies wielded monopolistic control over key industries in America. So the government set up the FTC to protect consumers from being squeezed by these powerful monopolies.

But a century later, Genghis Khan is using the vast powers of her office to wage war on legitimate business... and even capitalism itself.

A few months ago, for example, Genghis decided to ban “non-compete” clauses from employment contracts. This is one of the fundamental principles of capitalism: a voluntary agreement between an employer and employee to protect a company’s investment and intellectual property.

But Genghis Khan wouldn’t hear of it. So she banned non-competes, even though she had absolutely no legal authority to do so. And this is typical of her— she just invents whatever authority she wants.

Another example we talked about a few months ago— Genghis filed a lawsuit against two major grocery store chains (Albertsons and Kroger) to prevent them from merging.

Her claim is that the merger will harm labor unions, though she offers absolutely no reasonable explanation or evidence to support this assertion.

More importantly, her job is to protect CONSUMERS.... not labor unions. But here we have it again: Genghis Khan has once again invented new authority for herself to be the Protector of Unions... even though Congress never tasked her with that mission.

The whole thing is so absurd, in fact, that the FTC has no reason to suspect that the merger of these two grocery store chains will harm anyone at all. If anything, consumers should benefit.

The supermarket industry is extremely competitive, with traditional grocers now having to compete with tech companies, co-ops, farmers' markets, delivery apps, big-box warehouses like Costco, and even Walmart and Amazon.

For Albertsons and Kroger, it’s clear that a merger makes sense; it helps them optimize their cost structure, achieve greater efficiencies, and thus deliver savings in the form of lower prices to consumers.

And lowering prices isn’t some altruistic act by these companies; lower prices will make them more competitive.

But Genghis Khan has no understanding of how capitalism works. In the sentiment of her fellow Marxists, she views capitalism as a zero-sum game, best encapsulated by AOC’s false logic: “No one ever makes a billion dollars. You take a billion dollars.”

This way of thinking is completely false. Sure, 1,000 years ago when the real Genghis Khan was conquering the world, economics was indeed a zero-sum game. Nations got richer by plundering their neighbors, and individuals became wealthier by taking from others.

But that’s not what modern capitalism is about. It’s not a zero-sum game. Capitalism is about making the pie bigger. It’s about value creation. It’s about making everyone better off— workers, customers, investors, even the government that collects tax revenue. Everyone wins.

But FTC Chair Genghis Khan acts like it’s still the year 1209. She doesn’t understand modern economics or the value creation principles of capitalism. So her tendency is to engage in warfare— not with soldiers on the battlefield, but with lawyers in a courtroom. Albertsons and Kroger never had a chance.

For example, the FTC initially howled that the combined Albertsons and Kroger company would have too many locations. OK fine. So the companies promised to sell off a percentage of their stores, and they even found a buyer.

Then the FTC claimed there wouldn’t be enough stores, and competition would suffer.

“Damned if I do, damned if I don’t.” Again, the companies never had a chance. There’s no satisfying Genghis Khan. She doesn’t want to talk. She doesn’t want a solution. She just wants to go to war.

The hearing started yesterday, and both sides showed up to court ready to fight. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the case is quickly dismissed, or that reason prevails in court.

Either way, it’s not a great outcome. If Genghis wins, food prices are likely to rise. But even if she loses, she’ll just find some other business to attack, or some other pillar of capitalism to assault.

In Genghis’s mind, lawfare is always and everywhere the answer. And somehow we are all supposed to become more prosperous because of it.

That’s capitalism in the 21st century, folks: the federal government will sue its way into prosperity.

Unfortunately, Genghis Khan is not isolated in her way of thinking. In fact, one of her biggest cheerleaders is none other than Kamala Harris, who has applauded this lawsuit for taking on “corporate greed.”

This is the sad lie they always use try to explain inflation; rather than acknowledge that their own policies and profligate spending have led to higher prices, they blame greed. And promise to sue their way to lower prices. It’s genius.

And it’s not just Kamala either— Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, AOC, Bernie Sanders, and a whole bunch of other very vocal supporters (surprisingly from both parties) are all on board with this idiotic approach.

It represents an obvious risk to prosperity and success. And that is something that should be factored into the long term planning of anyone who wants to build anything of value in America.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

PS-

This doesn’t mean it’s impossible to build or maintain wealth in America. But in this type of environment, there are certain steps that are necessary to take in order to make sure you can come at the problems these people cause from a position of position of strength.

That’s why we started Schiff Sovereign: Premium, a highly educational, month-by-month guide that is designed to help you navigate the world from a position of strength, both personally and financially.  Click here to learn more.

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/how-genghis-khan-is-driving-your-grocery-bill-higher-151339/

The “Good Ship Transitory” Sank - The Captain Is Joking About It

The “Good Ship Transitory” Sank - The Captain Is Joking About It

Schiff Sovereign - August 26, 2024  By Peter Schiff

It almost sounded like an apology. Almost.

On Friday, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell stood in front of reporters and explained how we got here... and how inflation took hold.

To be fair, he rightly diagnosed the root causes: extreme government spending and money printing during the pandemic. And then, when the economy reopened after the lockdowns, there was a sudden surge in inflation.

The Fed and its army of experts assumed this inflation would be a temporary phenomenon—what they called “transitory.” They said that, due to the pandemic lockdowns being lifted, prices would rise suddenly, then fall back down.

This turned out to be one of the worst calls in the history of central banking. As we now know, inflation wasn’t transitory. Prices rose and continued to rise higher and higher, and they haven’t come back down.

To his credit, the chairman acknowledged this mistake on Friday.

But he was in quite a jovial mood about it, even joking with reporters about how in late 2021 they all set sail on, “The good ship transitory,” essentially making light of their enormous error that turned a lot of people’s lives upside down.

His joke got a lot of laughs from the room, and it’s nice to see there can be so much levity about a mistake that has cost Americans so dearly.

Adding to the sting is that this press briefing took place at the Federal Reserve’s annual retreat in Jackson Hole, Wyoming—one of the most exclusive and expensive resort towns in the world. And there he was, in fancy Jackson Hole, cracking jokes about blowing the inflation call—a mistake that has wreaked havoc on so many people’s lives.

To be honest it was a bit offensive... sort of like how many generals during World War I drank champagne as their men were being starved and slaughtered on the battlefield.

But again, it was at least an acknowledgment that they got it wrong. And this shouldn’t be an earth-shattering revelation. The Fed is not some all-knowing, all-powerful institution; it’s comprised of flawed human beings. Everyone makes mistakes— you, me, and the Fed Chairman too.

(Although ideally Fed officials would make fewer, smaller mistakes than the rest of us...)

Part of the reason the Fed was wrong is because they claim their decisions are data-driven. But the data they rely on is itself deeply flawed; just look at the most recent revision from the Labor Department, which is a major data source the Fed looks at when crafting policy decisions.

The Labor Department said last week that they were revising down the number of jobs created in 2023 by over 800,000. That’s a huge miss, and it proves that the data the Fed relies on to make decisions is also fundamentally flawed.

So basically our monetary system is run by flawed human beings who make far-reaching, life-altering decisions based on flawed data. What could possibly go wrong?

Quite a lot, obviously. And that’s why it’s worth briefly examining where else the Fed could get it wrong. And we see two clear items on the horizon:

One is the presidential election. A couple of weeks ago, the Fed chairman almost bragged about how the outcome of the Presidential and Congressional elections are irrelevant to them and do not factor into their economic forecasts at all.

This is completely absurd.

On the one hand, you have Kamala Harris, who wants to impose price controls, pass tax hikes, enforce arduous business regulations, push energy prices higher, and more.

On the other hand, Trump wants to reduce the independence of the Fed.

You couldn’t have more diametrically opposed policy outcomes. Yet the Fed is willfully ignoring the massive consequences of what could transpire in November. They’re not thinking about it or planning for it. And that is insane.

The second issue is the national debt. The Fed isn’t sounding the alarm bells. And in the past, it has actually supported the government spending even more money.

And it’s not like “the data” is suddenly absent here. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated an additional $22 trillion in new debt over the next decade. And generally, the CBO is conservative— meaning the debt will likely grow even quicker than that.

Who’s going to lend that money to the Treasury Department?

The Fed should know they will play a major role in funding government debt and deficits— triggering a massive money printing operation with major impacts. Yet they don’t say a word about it. They don’t seem to be thinking about it.

We’ve been clear about our assessment of this situation: $22 trillion in new debt will almost certainly be highly inflationary. And a Kamala Harris presidency is extremely likely to knock the US dollar off its throne as the world’s dominant reserve currency.

There’s a very narrow path to avoid that outcome, but it’s looking more and more likely every day.

You’d think the Fed would be planning for it. But they don’t say a word about it, and insist these factors don’t matter to them at all.

To us, this is why it makes so much sense to own real assets—scarce critical resources such as food, energy, key minerals, and productive technology.

If the Fed proves unable to tame inflation, critical commodities like these will grow in value.

And if by some miracle we avoid major inflation, there’s little downside to owning profitable businesses which produce some of the most vital resources on the planet.

Peter Schiff  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/peter-schiff-the-good-ship-transitory-sank-the-captain-is-joking-about-it-151335/

Can Elon Musk Save The US Dollar?

Can Elon Musk Save The US Dollar?

Notes From the Field By James Hickman / Simon Black  August 13, 2024

I was one of the millions of people listening to the live conversation last night between Elon Musk and Donald Trump.

And if you missed it, Trump was Trump. You pretty much know exactly what you’re getting with him, and there weren’t any major revelations.

Elon, on the other hand, came off as a genuinely concerned citizen who recognizes the problems facing the country and is exasperated why the people in charge aren’t implementing common sense solutions.

Honestly, I feel bad for the guy; Elon is blasted as a hard-core, right-wing nut job… and there are people who literally want to put him in prison because of his views.

But last night he said things like:

- “the legal system is supposed to be protecting the public from violent criminals”- “we want safe and clean cities”- “we want secure borders”- “we want sensible government spending”- “we want to restore both the perception and the reality of respect in the judicial system”- “I’m pro-environment, but I don’t think we should vilify the oil and gas industry”

These are clearly not radical values, and my guess is that most people in the country would probably agree with his values.

About an hour into the call, Elon outlined what he thinks would bring prosperity back to the United States:

1) “Solve government overspending”. He correctly explained that extreme government deficits create inflation… so if you want to really get inflation under control, you have to stop the spending.

In theory, this shouldn’t be hard.

The Treasury Department expects to collect nearly $5 trillion in tax revenue this Fiscal Year (which ends on September 30th). And $5 trillion is an absurd amount of money.

As recently as five years ago (FY2019), $5 trillion would have been enough to pay for ALL federal spending and still have a surplus of more than $500 billion to start paying down the debt.

So, if they had simply frozen spending in place at FY2019 levels, even after adjusting for inflation and higher interest rates, $5 trillion in tax revenue this year should still be sufficient to keep the national debt from growing any further. And that’s without making any significant cuts to government spending.

But spending has increased by nearly 50% in five years. Is the government 50% better? Do taxpayers receive 50% more service? Clearly not. They’ve just let spending spiral out of control with no commensurate benefit to the taxpayer.

2) Deregulate.

Elon’s second point was that a lot of regulations are destructive and make no sense. Volumes and volumes of rules hold back businesses from innovating, hold back citizens from being productive. And that’s what the country truly needs to be prosperous-- innovation and productivity.

And those were his two big points… and that if a government can do those two things, the future can be much brighter.

He’s right, and the math clearly supports this view.

Various Presidential administrations over time have increased, or decreased regulations. When there have been decreases in the number of regulations, US economic productivity tends to increase, and overall GDP growth rises. During periods of growing regulations (like right now), productivity wanes.

Higher productivity means that the economy grows faster. And a faster growing economy means more tax revenue for the government. Combined with spending constraints, this would leave plenty of money left over to pay down the debt… or simply set aside for a rainy day.

Imagine being able to obliterate a major threat to the nation, or shore up security to the power grid, or support an ally, without having to go into debt? It’s unimaginable given today’s national finances. But with real productivity growth and sensible spending, it’s absolutely a reality.

Failing to do BOTH of these things most likely results in a pretty bad outcome for the United States.

If the debt keeps spiraling out of control, and government regulators continue to constrain productivity, it’s extremely difficult to imagine the US dollar remaining the world’s primary reserve currency.

Continued deficit spending and a ballooning national debt will create even more inflation and cause foreign governments, central banks, and businesses to lose confidence in the dollar. It’s already happening… and one of the reasons why gold is hovering near its all-time high.

The US dollar’s global reserve status is one of America’s premier financial benefits. Losing it would be disastrous… and Elon’s approach is pretty much the only way to save it.

Will it happen?

To Read More:

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/can-elon-musk-save-the-us-dollar-151290/

The Federal Reserve Is Missing What Seems To Be Obvious To Everyone Else

The Federal Reserve Is Missing What Seems To Be Obvious To Everyone Else

Notes From The Field By Peter Schiff  August 7, 2024 

On Wednesday, March 8, 2023, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell was sworn in for testimony in front of members of Congress to deliver remarks about the state of the US economy.

Inflation had been raging for well over a year at that point, and, in response, the Fed had rapidly increased interest rates to levels not seen since 2007.

But nothing happens in a vacuum. The Fed cannot expect to jack up rates without some major consequences. And concerned members of Congress asked the Chairman about these potential consequences.

But Chairman Powell played them off, practically dismissing any risk to their raising rates and ‘tightening’ monetary policy, saying “nothing about the data suggests we’ve tightened too much. . .”

Two days later, Silicon Valley Bank went bust-- in large part because of the Fed’s interest rate increases.

And it wasn’t just Silicon Valley Bank that was in trouble. In fact, the FDIC reported over $600 billion in unrealized losses across the entire US banking system, and most of that due to higher interest rates.

It’s not hard to understand. Banks typically invest their customer deposits in either loans or bonds. And rule #1 with bonds is that, when interest rates rise, bond prices fall.

Even a first-day intern at the Fed would have known that. The Fed chairman should have certainly known that.

It was also in their own data. Remember, the Fed is also one of the key supervisors of the US banking system, so they had access to all of Silicon Valley Bank’s financial records. They saw the losses piling up, they saw the risks.

This is what’s so bizarre. The Fed always claims to be looking at the data and says that their economic prognostications are based on data.

But again, the Fed had the data. It was glaring at them. But they failed to anticipate any consequences to their rate hikes-- even TWO DAYS before a major bank collapsed.

Sadly, the Fed chairman seems to have outdone even that bad call.

Last week he told a room full of reporters that economic weakness is “not what we’re seeing” and that the economic data are “not signaling a weak economy. . . ”

He went on to say that chances of a “hard landing are low” and that “the picture [of the US economy] is not one of slowing.”

Yet once again, literally days later, a meltdown in financial markets took place worldwide… because investors finally realized that the Fed has no idea what they’re talking about.

And everyone from Pepsi to McDonald’s to Heineken to Cartier to Porsche has been reporting slower growth or declines in sales.

This morning Disney reported a slowdown in its parks division-- which is typically rock solid. Proctor & Gamble reported a decline in sales of Tide laundry detergent and Charmin toilet paper. The list goes on and on.

Monday’s sudden market swoon has calmed. But in large part that sense of calm is because investors are now pricing in a near 100% chance of a 50-basis point (0.5%) rate cut at the Fed’s September meeting. There are even some expectations of an emergency rate cut before the September meeting.

Again, they claimed just a week ago that the chances of a hard landing “are low”, and that a 50-basis point cut is “not something we’re thinking about”. Yet just days later, it became clear that the economy is slowing, and unemployment is moving higher.

(It’s also notable that most of the growth in labor market now is with government jobs, which actually hurt the economy.)

So, the Fed is almost certainly going to have to reverse itself and start making big rate cuts. Frankly, they have no other option, if for no other reason than the national debt.

The US government has trillions and trillions of dollars of bonds which are maturing this year and next. And the Treasury Department clearly doesn’t have the cash to pay them back. So instead, they’ll have to reissue more bonds to pay back the old bonds. Sounds a bit like a Ponzi scheme to me.

Their problem is that the new bonds will carry a much higher rate of interest than the old bonds… which the federal government absolutely cannot afford.

Think about it: $10 trillion worth of bonds paying a 1% coupon costs $100 billion per year in interest. That’s a lot, but it’s manageable. If they have to refinance $10 trillion at 5%, the annual interest bill increases to $500 billion… which is showstopper.

So, the Fed HAS to cut rates-- not only to jump start the economy and prevent a recession… but to bail out the US government and give the Treasury Department the opportunity to refinance its debt at a lower rate.

However, these rate cuts, combined with yet another round of quantitative easing (i.e. money printing), will just end up bringing a LOT more inflation to the US economy.

Naturally the Fed is not forecasting any of this. They don’t see the inflation problem ahead. They keep claiming that they’re looking at the data… yet they consistently misdiagnose what’s happening in the economy.

It’s like an ER doctor who examines a patient with a gunshot wound and prescribes a course of stool softeners. They’re missing what seems to be obvious to everyone else.

Look, these guys are human beings too. They’re not perfect, they’re going to make mistakes. But that’s the problem with this monetary system: a handful of bureaucrats with bad track records are awarded the most powerful authority in finance and expected to be infallible.

It’s a deeply, deeply flawed system, and it’s bizarre that anyone has any confidence in it.

The Fed is not all-powerful. Not only do they not see the coming danger, but they’re powerless to stop it. And Monday’s meltdown is a sign that the market is starting to figure that out.

Peter Schiff  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/peter-schiff-the-fed-prescribes-stool-softeners-for-america-151217/

This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things.

This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things.

Notes From the Field By James Hickman / Simon Black   August 5, 2024

Athenian general Miltiades was already a hero across ancient Greece when he set sail for the island of Paros in 489 BC.

Born into stardom as the son and nephew of famous Olympic champions, Miltiades made a name for himself as one of the most important and successful commanders in the Greek war against Persia.

In fact, Miltiades was responsible for devising the incredibly unique, surprise battle plan that confounded the Persian army at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC. The Greeks were vastly outnumbered and outmatched... but they annihilated the Persians thanks to Miltiades’ tactical genius, making him an instant celebrity-hero throughout the region.

So, when he approached the Athenian government the following year and requested to lead a special mission to reclaim lost Greek territory in the Aegean Sea, they approved his mission without question. And the Hero of Marathon set sail a few months later with a fleet of 70 ships.

Unfortunately for Miltiades, his voyage was a total disaster; his fleet was nearly vanquished, he lost a great number of men, and he was unable to take the island of Paros. So, when he returned to Athens, all of his former heroics were forgotten… and people wanted his head. Literally.

It was commonplace in ancient Greece for politicians and military leaders to be held accountable for their decisions; many were even put on trial at the end of their rule and had their administrations publicly scrutinized.

These weren’t political witch hunts; rather, they were a form of checks-and-balances whereby anyone found to have been truly incompetent, disloyal, or duplicitous would be severely punished.

Miltiades-- again, the Hero of Marathon-- was charged with treason for causing such severe and embarrassing losses in his ill-fated Paros expedition. He was tried, convicted, and ultimately sentenced to death… however this was eventually reduced to a fine of 50 talents (roughly $10 million in today’s money) and a lengthy prison sentence.

Sometimes I feel like the Greeks were really on to something.

Sure, the world is complicated, and there’s never any guarantee of success in warfare, business, life, politics, etc. Decision makers don’t have a crystal ball and rarely have perfect information… so there can never be any certainty about future outcomes.

But leaders have a moral and legal obligation to always do their best… and to make rational decisions and take sensible risks. Most importantly, whenever there’s new information, they have an obligation to challenge their own decisions and adjust course if necessary.

Failure to do so is arrogant, deliberate incompetence.

We saw this all throughout the pandemic; at first, there was very little information available, and politicians’ knee-jerk reaction was to enact the most extreme measures.

But six-months later there was plenty of data. And politicians had plenty of opportunity to review the updated information, summon their courage, and make better, more rational decisions.

Some places (Florida) did. Others (New York, California) stuck to their failed, idiotic, destructive policies. They kept people locked down, they kept the schools closed, and they exacted an incalculable toll on their citizens.

But they will never be held accountable for their incompetence. Instead, they end up on lucrative speaking tours, awarded highly paid consulting or board positions, or advanced outrageous sums for their memoirs.

And this leads me to what’s happening in England right now.

As you’re probably aware, a sick-o teenager in northern England stabbed a bunch of kids last week in a horrifying rampage. Nine children were wounded, and at least three have died.

Rumors quickly circulated that the attacker was a Muslim refugee who had arrived by boat to England’s shores, and violent riots quickly broke out across the country.

The government and media were quick to correct the rumor; the 17-year-old attacker (he turns 18 on Wednesday) was born in the UK and is the son of Rwandan immigrants.

Then they further denounced the rioters as “far right” and “racist”, and the Prime Minister threatened to use the full force of the law against them.

Look, it’s completely inexcusable for rioters to engage in violence and destruction of property. But it’s also inexcusable for politicians to run their country into the ground.

The media has been quick to condemn the rioters. But they are completely silent, and frankly complicit, regarding the destruction of their country.

To Read More:  https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/this-is-why-we-cant-have-nice-things-151207/

This Is One Of The Only Ways They Can Tame Inflation And Save The Dollar

This Is One Of The Only Ways They Can Tame Inflation And Save The Dollar

Notes From the Field By James  Hickman / Simon Black  July 31, 2024

There are only seven countries in the world that have a GDP in excess of $3 trillion: the United States. China. Germany. Japan. India. United Kingdom. And France.

Microsoft’s current market capitalization is also right around $3 trillion… which means that out of the 193 countries in the world that are recognized by the United Nations, 186 of them have an economy that’s smaller than Microsoft. Crazy.

Of course, much of Microsoft’s meteoric growth has taken place over the past three years because of the AI boom. And just like Nvidia is considered the most important hardware company in AI, Microsoft has positioned itself as the most important software company in AI… and they’re pretty much betting the business on it.

According to the company’s earnings release yesterday, Microsoft has generated an unbelievable $118 billion in Operating Cash Flow (OCF) over the past twelve months.

(OCF, if you’re not familiar, is a much more useful metric than ‘net income’ or ‘profit’ because it strips out all the non-cash accounting nonsense like depreciation.)

$118 billion in operating cash flow is a staggering amount of money. But what’s even crazier is that Microsoft spent almost every penny-- more than $113 billion-- making new investments in their business. And most of those were AI-related investments.

In short, Microsoft is a profit machine. But it’s dumping 96% of those profits into AI, in large part to justify having a $3+ trillion valuation.

Time will tell if those investments pan out, and whether Microsoft is able to build viable products that generate a sufficient return.

There’s no guarantee; AI is an extremely competitive industry where budding startups and giant tech companies are both working on the next big thing. And I have to wonder how much upside is left for a business that already has a $3 trillion valuation, relative to the competitive risks against Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple, etc.

Yesterday the company announced that growth in their cloud ‘Azure’ business (which includes their AI revenue) was 29% year-over-year. That growth rate was slightly lower than last quarter’s 31% growth.

But even a tiny, 2% decline in growth had the market freaking out. And Microsoft stock initially plunged more than 8% in after-hours trading-- roughly $250 billion in market value. That’s larger than the economy of New Zealand.

The stock recovered much of those losses this morning. But the mini meltdown is a clear demonstration of the risk involved: even a hint of a slowdown can trigger punishing losses.

Bottom line, AI is absolutely disruptive technology and a major game changer. But we’re still in very early days; there’s a long way to go, and it’s far too early to declare a winner. Yahoo looked like the dominant Internet titan in the late 1990s, but the landscape changed dramatically.

Maybe Microsoft ends up winning the race. But there’s a lot of uncertainty in drawing that conclusion right now.

One thing that’s NOT uncertain, however, is that AI someday going to be as integral to daily life as mobile phones and the Internet are today.

We also know that AI will continue to consume ridiculous amounts of electricity — electricity, which the US grid does not have right now (and Europe is in even worse shape relative to its electrical grid).

Thanks to horrendous government incentives and propaganda by the inspired idiots and climate fanatics in the media, electrical supply from “renewable sources”, i.e. wind and solar, has skyrocketed over the past few years.

It’s no coincidence that the country is simultaneously facing major capacity shortfalls and power outages… because, you know, sometimes the sun doesn’t shine, and the wind doesn’t blow.

The green fantasy is that wind and solar are going to save the planet. But if you’re honest about the math, they’re really not all that clean.

First, you must mine a lot of really dirty resources (like cobalt) in vast quantities from places in Africa which rely on child labor in extremely dangerous conditions. But you’ll never hear Greta Thunberg utter a word about that.

Then you have to manufacture 2-6x more solar panels and wind turbines… because, again, there are occasions when the sun doesn’t shine (like nighttime!) and the wind doesn’t blow.

In the end, wind and solar end up using a lot more resources per kilowatt-hour of electricity produced than many conventional sources, and a lot of the material used are really bad for the environment.

Nuclear is a far more environmentally friendly, far more efficient way to produce electricity. And hopefully that will make a comeback… though the nuclear renaissance is likely still some years away.

In the meantime, there is an incredibly cheap, abundant, and much cleaner source of fuel that can solve America’s electrical capacity shortages and power the AI revolution: it’s natural gas.

I wrote about this last week, saying that US natural gas is a ‘picks and shovels’ investment in the AI boom.

It won’t be clear for a long time who will win the AI race. In the late 1990s, Yahoo looked to be the dominant tech titan… but the landscape changed dramatically over the next decade.

But again, we do know that AI will consume more power than the US grid has available. And the ONLY viable option to supply that power right now is natural gas.

The US is one of the wealthiest nations in the world when it comes to natural gas reserves. In fact, supply is so vast that US natural gas prices are laughably cheap; relative to the amount of energy contained in a unit of US natural gas, it’s priced at the equivalent of about $15 oil. That’s cheap.

So cheap, in fact, that an electrical grid powered by natural gas can not only deliver the quantity of electricity necessary to power the nation (and AI boom), but it could dramatically reduce energy costs.

This is a big deal. Energy prices influence the price of everything. If electricity is cheap, consumers and families save money. Manufacturing costs less. Services cost less. Transportation costs less. Everything becomes cheaper and more efficient.

To be even more clear, a natural gas renaissance could generate greater US economy growth, potentially even leading to higher tax revenue and lower deficits.

In short, natural gas is one of the only ways that they’ll be able to tame the inflation problem and save the dollar. And with natural gas prices so cheap right now, it seems to me that there’s a lot more upside in the energy of the future, than in companies that are already selling for trillions of dollars.

To your freedom,  James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

PS — If you want to go even deeper into this topic, we definitely want to encourage you to check out Schiff Sovereign: Premium. it’s packed with some incredible insights, including Plan B strategies and compelling investment research. The upcoming issue due out in a few weeks will go into far more detail about this trend, as well as some ways to invest.

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/this-is-one-of-the-only-ways-they-can-tame-inflation-and-save-the-dollar-151198/

“Inflationary Forces”? Duh

“Inflationary Forces”? Duh 

Notes From the Field By James Hickman / Simon Black 7-16-24

Jamie Dimon is the CEO of JP Morgan Chase, one of the world’s largest banks. And last week he issued a stern warning on the bank’s quarterly earnings call that “multiple inflationary forces” are still lurking.

File that one away under “duh”. It should be completely obvious to just about anyone paying attention to the world that many of the key drivers that rocketed inflation higher are still with us.

The Federal Reserve, of course, desperately wants to pretend that inflation is in the rear-view mirror, never to return. And they keep insisting that the downward trend of inflation justifies their interest rate cuts.

But as Mr. Dimon points out, “large fiscal deficits, infrastructure needs, restructuring of trade and remilitarization of the world” all create high risk of substantial inflation.

We agree with him.

“Remilitarization of the world”, i.e. conflict, is very expensive. The very nature of war means consuming vast quantities of resources to produce munitions that will destroy your adversaries’ resources.

Most governments don’t have the money to do this. The last time the United States was able to fund a war without going into debt was the Spanish-American War in 1898. Every other war, or even preparation for war, required significant additional debt... which ultimately resulted in printing more money.

So, in the end, warfare means more money in the system, but fewer resources. This is the very definition of inflation.

Dimon mentions trade disputes as well, which are also very expensive.

Free trade creates wealth. It allows countries and producers to specialize in what they do best, and trade for what other countries do best.

Germany is great at high tech manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and various other industries. But they can’t produce bananas to save their life.

Fortunately, Guatemala exists. Guatemala has no high-tech industry. But they’re great at bananas. It’s a sensible trade.

When nations are in dispute with one another, trade breaks down and they start having to produce goods and services where they have no expertise.

Sometimes it works out; in one of their endless wars with France, Britain boycotted French wine... and in the process, accidentally invented port. But usually, such inefficiencies create a lot of inflation.

Dimon also mentions infrastructure needs. And that’s a massive understatement.

The US highway system is deteriorating. Amtrak is blowing money without any serious improvements. California is tens of billions of dollars over budget, and several years late, for a high-speed rail it promised from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

It doesn’t help that they put $1 trillion in the hands of an incompetent diversity hire like Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

All of this money will need to be conjured out of thin air by the central bank, which, again, is inflationary.

Lastly, Dimon also references “large fiscal deficits”, which is putting it politely.

We’ve said it many times— the government’s own internal projections expect an extra $22 TRILLION in deficit spending (i.e. new debt) on top of the $35 trillion national debt, over the next decade. Most of that will come within the next five years.

Deficits are inflationary, as we have seen over the past few years.

To be fair, there are some potential deflationary forces as well.

Increases in productivity are very deflationary. Technology, driven by artificial intelligence, could be monumental in improving productivity and keeping prices down.

Yet there are also a lot of people in government (and even within the AI industry), trying to slow down development and hold back AI.

Capitalism— which encourages competition to offer the best quality goods and services at the lowest prices— is also deflationary.

Unfortunately, many people in power despise capitalism and rail against it as racist, misogynist, or bad for the planet.

To Read More:   https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/inflationary-forces-duh-151157/

3 Real Assets Primed For Growth In The Coming Inflation Bonanza

3 Real Assets Primed For Growth In The Coming Inflation Bonanza 

Notes From The Field  By James Hickman/Simon Black 7-11-24

After today’s inflation report showing ‘only’ 3% inflation, the Federal Reserve is all but guaranteed to start slashing interest rates.

The Fed Chairman essentially promised as much to Congress earlier this week, and has warned that if they don’t start cutting interest rates soon, “we could undermine the [economic] recovery.”

These guys still don’t get it. At this point it’s not even about 3% inflation (which is still too high) or 2% inflation. It’s about prices going back down to pre-pandemic levels… or just lower in general.

But that’s just never going to happen. The Fed doesn’t care about price reductions; they’re happy with a slower rate of price increases… which is totally out of touch with what people want and need.

They’ve been itching to cut rates for months… almost desperate. And in large part that’s because they’re terrified about the US government’s insolvency.

The national debt is about to pass $35 trillion. And high interest rates mean that the annual interest bill this year will exceed the US military budget-- more than $800 billion-- for the first time in nearly 250 years of American history.

The Fed knows that they have to slash interest rates as quickly as possible. With ultra-low rates (like 1.5%), the interest bill on a $35 trillion national debt is manageable… as long as the federal government can rein in spending and stop the debt from growing further.

Of course there are two key problems with this thinking:

First, there is zero evidence that the government will rein in spending. If anything, they seem primed to spend even more. I’ve mentioned several times before that even the US government’s own budget forecasts project more than $22 trillion in additional debt over the next decade.

Second, slashing interest rates will most likely result in significant inflation-- just like we saw in 2021-2022.

We’ve written before how real assets are a safe haven from inflation, and I wanted to briefly discuss three real assets that look especially promising.

The first is physical gold and silver, which serve as a store of value-- especially during inflationary times.

Higher inflation will likely trigger a surge in demand, making the price of precious metals not only keep up with inflation, but exceed it.

But there is another reason why gold will do especially well the worse inflation gets.

The worse inflation becomes, and the worse the US national debt becomes, the more likely the US dollar will lose its spot as the dominant reserve currency. And central banks all over the world-- India, Poland, Singapore, etc. have been feverishly buying up physical gold over the past few years, most likely to prepare for that potential change.

So if inflation picks up, it’s a good bet that central banks will keep buying up gold-- and driving prices higher.

Gold mining stocks should also do extremely well in that scenario due to their exposure to gold prices.

What’s interesting right now, though, is that despite gold being near an all-time high, share prices of many gold mining companies are incredibly cheap.

That’s because central banks-- which have driven gold prices to record highs-- only buy physical gold bullion. They do not buy gold stocks.

However, while the price of gold has already increased substantially, the stock prices of many great gold miners has not.

This is because most of the current demand for gold is coming from central banks. And central banks only buy physical gold— not gold mining stocks.

This means that gold stocks are currently a bargain-- with a LOT of upside potential.

Last, US natural gas is another compelling real asset primed for huge growth.

Right now, natural gas prices in the US are dramatically lower than they are in Europe… and it’s easy to understand why: the US has some of the biggest natural gas reserves in the world, while Europe has almost nothing by comparison. (This is why Europe is so reliant on Russian gas).

And since Joe Biden has banned new LNG (liquefied natural gas) export terminals from the US, it’s difficult to move that US natural gas to Europe.

This is why prices in the US are less than $3, versus more than $10 in Europe. If US producers were free to export, prices in the US would rise, prices in Europe would fall, and the global natural gas prices would be more or less the same, similar to oil.

In terms of energy equivalence to oil, $3 per million BTU natural gas is the equivalent of paying around $15 - $20 for a barrel of oil. That’s cheap. And it means US natural gas is the most underpriced conventional energy commodity in the world.

But it probably won’t stay that way for long.

First, large tech companies, which are building massive, energy-hungry AI data centers, are also looking at putting in their own power plants… which will most likely be powered by natural gas.

Second, the new export terminal ban probably won’t last. There are lawsuits, legislation, and an upcoming election, any one of which could restart new LNG exports. When this happens, US natural gas prices could quickly rise.

In either case, natural gas producers stand to benefit substantially from higher prices. And it just so happens that shares of many of the best quality producers right now are laughably cheap, with low multiples relative to earnings, book value, and Free Cash Flow.

Looking at the overall investment landscape now, with many conventional stocks and indexes near all time highs, these three sectors strike me as some of the most promising investments for an inflationary environment.

To your freedom,   James Hickman  Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC

https://www.schiffsovereign.com/investing/3-real-assets-primed-for-growth-in-the-coming-inflation-bonanza-151138/