“The last few weeks have demonstrated how prone the market is to FCI easing when the marginal policy decision becomes incrementally dovish.”
“As mentioned in prior notes, I believe this would be a mistake...FCI easing is NOT what the Fed needs at this stage of their inflation fight.”
“Based on the current/realised levels of FCI, the GDP impulse fades from close to -2% currently to -1.2% in Q1 and then turns positive by Q3 next year.”
“…risk is that when those negative impulses wash out (temporary on the way up so temporary on the way down), we are left with sticky inflation above the target range, largely driven by high wage growth.”
👆
+Core/Energy Tag-Team as Oil hits Supply/Demand Singularity Point.
How apropos for the times.
As a gamer I am pleased about this. I don't wanna see a whole bunch of games become "Xbox exclusives" especially since PS5 is a superior platform.
“we’re going into 2023 with a stock market that charges an 18 multiple for the prospect of ... 0% earnings growth."
Is that bad?
Re: Mental Model-Destructive/Constructive Interference In Econ Cycles
Thinking about where we are in the Oil Cycle reminds me of this this Mental Model from Physics.
(SHORT THREAD)
Econ cycles come in varying wavelengths; LT cycles = long wavelengths & ST cycles = short wavelengths.
ST cycles often oscillate within LT cycles.
In Oil, LT cycles are driven by capex cycles that have 5-10 year gestation periods and primarily affect SUPPLY. ST cycles are driven by the macroeconomy and primarily affect DEMAND.
In this Mental Model, I’m making a simplifying assumption that this complex interplay between Supply and Demand boils down to LT/ST impacts on PRICE.
Even this simplifying assumption is complicated by the differing wavelengths that result in periods where super-imposed waves are out-of-phase vs. in-phase.
Destructive Interference occurs when one wave is out-of-phase with another -> Overall superimposed wave is DAMPENED.
Constructive Interference occurs when one wave is in-phase with another -> Overall superimposed wave is AMPLIFIED.
Oil is going into a period of Destructive Interference now, but it will be followed by a period of Constructive Interference.
This is how it is entirely consistent to have a ST bearish view due to macro demand factors while still maintaining a LT bullish view due to LT capex trends.
(END THREAD)
The Structural Supply/Demand Singularity in Oil occurs when the ST cycles get back in-phase with the LT capex cycle.
I think there is a good probability of this occurring in 2024.
One thing I didn’t mention in this Mental Model is wave AMPLITUDE.
LT cycle may have a very large ultimate amplitude but wavelength is long so an negative (out-of-phase) ST cycle of large amplitude can dominate for periods of time.
“Talking the talk but not walking the walk” has literally been one of the cornerstones of China’s Unrestricted Warfare on the US and its Allies over the last 25 years.
They have counted correctly on useful idiots on both sides of the Atlantic to get frog-boiled into an untenable situation.
Thank god we have an Energy Secretary @SecretaryWright that understands that we need ALL forms of energy (and the difference between gas and gasoline!).
The thing I like about Bold Bowman is that she’s no bullshit and calls it like it is when the facts change.
She called out Pusillanimous Powell for his inexplicable Premature Pivot, and now she’s calling out Parsimonious Powell for his newfound intransigence.
You gotta love the Anti-Gretzky of Fed Chairs:
JPOW is master of skating to where the puck WAS…
Trump rug-pulled Copper today,.
Lakshmi thinks it's a warmup for Oil as do I, and perhaps that's what $XOP is already sniffing out.
Continued evidence of Net DEFLATIONARY impacts of Trump 2.0 Playbook.
Observations:
1. It’s hard to have runaway Inflation when one of its key linchpins, Oil, has become a Geopolitical Football. 2. The continued ME lovefest for Trump should have Oil Bulls worried. 3. Trump wants Oil to be < $50, and I think the Saudis will help achieve that because they alone can make for lost price with increased VOLUMES.
Result:
1. Inflation stays quiescent 2. Iran and Russia are in a weaker negotiating position that could catalyze peace settlements 3. Peace settlements would result in Sanctions relief, which means MORE OIL
Never quite seen anything like this.
The Geopolitical/Macro implications of a Peace Dividend + NATO shouldering more of its Defense Spending are BIG.
It means:
1. Lower Geopolitical Risk Premiums for Commodities like Oil and Gold due to Sanctions Relief 2. Lower Oil prices from Saudis (this has been a core thesis of mine for quite some time) 3. Lower Defense Spending needs for US
Outside of Entitlements, the two biggest line items in our Budget Deficit are Defense and Interest Expense — and both go DOWN with a Peace Dividend.
This is the path out of the Vodka Red Bull Economy.
A ME Peace Dividend anchored around the US also cements the role of the Petrodollar, which has obviously implications on the USD’s status as GRC (Global Reserve Currency) and the UST’s status as GRA (Global Reserve Asset).
If you didn’t know this, you haven’t been reading Kaoboy Musings!
Here are the two most pernicious Perma-Bull arguments used to rationalize a Bullish Oil thesis I have heard throughout my career:
1. Saudi Fiscal Breakeven is XXX, much higher than current Oil prices. 2. Inflation-adjusted Oil price should be XXX, much higher than current Oil prices.
Oil Prices are based on marginal Supply/Demand. PERIOD.
And right now, Demand is faltering even as Supply becomes a game of Geopolitical Football because Trump 2.0 knows that:
1. Revenues = Price X Volume 2. Saudis are the ONLY global producer who can make up for lost Price with INCREASED VOLUMES
Duration via Long USTs looks very interesting again.
Long Bonds look extremely oversold and yieldy even as that shiny alternative Supply Inelastic Reserve Asset seems to be losing its luster and looking toppy.
There's also an Economic Statecraft angle that I've postulated before:
What happens when Trump 2.0 offers incentives to hold Long USTs in lieu of anything else? How about tying FX Swap Line capacity to UST holdings?
I am buying $TLT Call Spreads.
Qatar saw yesterday's Saudi deal and said, "CALL & RAISE."
Again, the implications for USD Petrodollar recycling are huge.
Here is some AI analysis of today's US/UK Trade Deal.
What I see:
US traded 10% Blanket Tariffs in exchange for allowing UK to keep PRE-EXISTING Tariffs on Auto and Ag.
This is a key observation:
For those of you who think that the US is the bully here, these Tariffs are actually seeking to redress PRE-EXISTING discriminatory Tariffs AGAINST the US.
This example shows the world that Trump is fine raising cash with Tariffs — even against an Ally (who is insistent on keeping Pre-Existing Tariffs).
Now imagine if you’re NOT an Ally that has huge Pre-Existing Tariffs/Trade Barriers in Critical Path Industries.
The UK produces nothing in Critical Path Industries. Watch out for the incoming Long Term Incentive Modifier Tariffs.👇
Two key observations from the Trump presser on the UK/US Deal:
1. “10% is a likely the lowest number, and they’re getting a good deal compared to those who have treated us very badly.” 2. Trump talked about China more than the UK in the UK/US Presser.
Saving Face is everything in the Chinese culture, so if this is the narrative that Xi needs to engage, my advice to Trump 2.0 is: Let the Wookie “win.”
I completely agree with @michaelxpettis on the intractability of China’s fundamental problem, which is really a sovereign version of the Innovator’s Dilemma:
To transition to a Consumer Economy would mean that China must cannibalize its existing Top-Down Investment Led GDP-Targeting Economic Model.
But to do so risks slowing down the Runaway Assembly Line which must be kept humming to keep its already restive masses employed.
Scylla, meet Charybdis.
@michaelxpettis Join us as we discuss the transition of Pusillanimous Powell to Parsimonious Powell today:
Some good color behind the recent dramatic downtick in GDP from @profstonge’s Substack today.
Reminder that the formula for Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is GDP = C + I + G + (X - M), where C represents consumption, I represents investment, G represents government spending, and (X - M) represents net exports (exports minus imports).
“The kicker is all the pain was caused by a 41% surge of imports front-running tariffs. Which GDP bizarrely counts as negative GDP. Drop those and actual GDP soared by a blistering 4 and a half percent.”
“BLS said investment skyrocketed on the quarter by 22 percent. Much of it driven, ironically, by the very same tariffs that took the headline number negative…So going by these numbers, America is re-industrializing at light speed. And the tip of the spear is foreign companies moving production here.”
You may disagree with the way it which they were implemented, but the Trump 2.0 Tariffs are working.
“Trump is begging for a deal, and Xi isn’t taking his call.”
Uh huh.
Jensen is smart but maybe too cute by half. This needs to be stopped.