Nouriel Roubini: I fear the worst is yet to come

When this man predicted a global financial crisis more than a year ago, people laughed. Not any more…

by Dominic Rushe — The Sunday Times — October 26, 2008
 

As stock markets headed off a cliff again last week, closely followed by currencies, and as meltdown threatened entire countries such as Hungary and Iceland, one voice was in demand above all others to steer us through the gloom: that of Dr Doom.

For years Dr Doom toiled in relative obscurity as a New York University economics professor under his alias, Nouriel Roubini. But after making a series of uncannily accurate predictions about the global meltdown, Roubini has become the prophet of his age, jetting around the world dispensing his advice and latest prognostications to politicians and businessmen desperate to know what happens next – and for any answer to the crisis.

While the economic sun was shining, most other economists scoffed at Roubini and his predictions of imminent disaster. They dismissed his warnings that the sub-prime mortgage disaster would trigger a financial meltdown. They could not quite believe his view that the US mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would collapse, and that the investment banks would be crushed as the world headed for a long recession.

Yet all these predictions and more came true. Few are laughing now.

What does Roubini think is going to happen next? Rather worryingly, in London last Thursday he predicted that hundreds of hedge funds will go bust and stock markets may soon have to shut – perhaps for as long as a week – in order to stem the panic selling now sweeping the world.

What happened? The next day trading was briefly stopped in New York and Moscow.

Dubbed Dr Doom for his gloomy views, this lugubrious disciple of the “dismal science” is now the world’s most in-demand economist. He reckons he is getting about four hours’ sleep a night. Last week he was in Budapest, London, Madrid and New York. Next week he will address Congress in Washington. Do not expect any good news.

Contacted in Madrid on Friday, Roubini said the world economy was “at a breaking point”. He believes the stock markets are now “essentially in free fall” and “we are reaching the point of sheer panic”.

For all his recent predictive success, his critics still urge calm. They charge he is a professional doom-monger who was banging on about recession for years as the economy boomed. Roubini is stung by such charges, dismissing them as “pathetic”.

He takes no pleasure in bad news, he says, but he makes his standpoint clear: “Frankly I was right.” A combative, complex man, he is fond of the word “frankly”, which may be appropriate for someone so used to delivering bad news.

Born in Istanbul 49 years ago, he comes from a family of Iranian Jews. They moved to Tehran, then to Tel Aviv and finally to Italy, where he grew up and attended college, graduating summa cum laude in economics from Bocconi University before taking a PhD in international economics at Harvard.

Fluent in English, Italian, Hebrew, and Persian, Roubini has one of those “international man of mystery” accents: think Henry Kissinger without the bonhomie. Single, he lives in a loft in Manhattan’s trendy Tribeca, an area popularised by Robert De Niro, and collects contemporary art.

Despite his slightly mad-professor look, he is at pains to make clear he is normal. “I’m not a geek,” said Roubini, who sounds rather concerned that people might think he is. “I mean it frankly. I’m not a geek.”

He is, however, ferociously bright. When he left Harvard, he moved quickly, holding various positions at the Treasury department, rising to become an economic adviser to Bill Clinton in the late 1990s. Then his profile seemed to plateau. His doubts about the economic outlook seemed out of tune with the times, especially when a few years ago he began predicting a meltdown in the financial markets through his blog, hosted on RGEmonitor. com, the website of his advisory company.

But it was a meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in September 2006 that earned him his nickname Dr Doom.

Roubini told an audience of fellow economists that a generational crisis was coming. A once-in-a-lifetime housing bust would lay waste to the US economy as oil prices soared, consumers stopped shopping and the country went into a deep recession.

The collapse of the mortgage market would trigger a global meltdown, as trillions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities unravelled. The shockwaves would destroy banks and other big financial institutions such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, America’s largest home loan lenders.

“I think perhaps we will need a stiff drink after that,” the moderator said. Members of the audience laughed.

Economics is not called the dismal science for nothing. While the public might be impressed by Nostradamus-like predictions, economists want figures and equations. Anirvan Banerji, economist with the New York-based Economic Cycle Research Institute, summed up the feeling of many of those at the IMF meeting when he delivered his response to Roubini’s talk.

Banerji questioned Roubini’s assumptions, said they were not based on mathematical models and dismissed his hunches as those of a Cassandra. At first, indeed, it seemed Roubini was wrong. Meltdown did not happen. Even by the end of 2007, the financial and economic outlook was grim but not disastrous.

Then, in February 2008, Roubini posted an entry on his blog headlined: “The rising risk of a systemic financial meltdown: the twelve steps to financial disaster”.

It detailed how the housing market collapse would lead to huge losses for the financial system, particularly in the vehicles used to securitise loans. It warned that “ a national bank” might go bust, and that, as trouble deepened, investment banks and hedge funds might collapse.

Even Roubini was taken aback at how quickly this scenario unfolded. The following month the US investment bank Bear Stearns went under. Since then, the pace and scale of the disaster has accelerated and, as Roubini predicted, the banking sector has been destroyed, Freddie and Fannie have collapsed, stock markets have gone mad and the economy has entered a frightening recession.

Roubini says he was able to predict the catastrophe so accurately because of his “holistic” approach to the crisis and his ability to work outside traditional economic disciplines. A long-time student of financial crises, he looked at the history and politics of past crises as well as the economic models.

“These crises don’t come out of nowhere,” he said. “Usually they arrive because of a systematic increase in a variety of asset and credit bubbles, macro-economic policies and other vulnerabilities. If you combine them, you may not get the timing right but you get an indication that you are closer to a tipping point.”

Others who claimed the economy would escape a recession had been swept up in “a critical euphoria and mania, an irrational exuberance”, he said. And many financial pundits, he believes, were just talking up their own vested interests. “I might be right or wrong, but I have never traded, bought or sold a single security in my life. I am trying to be as objective as I can.”

What does his objectivity tell him now? No end is yet in sight to the crisis.

“Every time there has been a severe crisis in the last six months, people have said this is the catastrophic event that signals the bottom. They said it after Bear Stearns, after Fannie and Freddie, after AIG [the giant US insurer that had to be rescued], and after [the $700 billion bailout plan]. Each time they have called the bottom, and the bottom has not been reached.”

Across the world, governments have taken more and more aggressive actions to stop the panic. However, Roubini believes investors appear to have lost confidence in governments’ ability to sort out the mess.

The announcement of the US government’s $700 billion bailout, Gordon Brown’s grand bank rescue plan and the coordinated response of governments around the world has done little to calm the situation. “It’s been a slaughter, day after day after day,” said Roubini. “Markets are dysfunctional; they are totally unhinged.” Economic fundamentals no longer apply, he believes.

“Even using the nuclear option of guaranteeing everything, providing unlimited liquidity, nationalising the banks, making clear that nobody of importance is going to be allowed to fail, even that has not helped. We are reaching a breaking point, frankly.”

He believes governments will have to come up with an even bigger international rescue, and that the US is facing “multi-year economic stagnation”.

Given such cataclysmic talk, some experts fear his new-found influence may be a bad thing in such troubled times. One senior Wall Street figure said: “He is clearly very bright and thoughtful when he is not shooting from the hip.”

He said he found some of Roubini’s comments “slapdash and silly”. “Sometimes the rigour of his analysis seems to be missing,” he said.

Banerji still has problems with Roubini’s prescient IMF speech. “He has been very accurate in terms of what would happen,” he said. But Roubini was predicting an “imminent” recession by the start of 2007 and he was wrong. “He hurt his credibility by being so pessimistic long before it was appropriate.”

Banerji said on average the US economy had grown for five years before hitting a bad patch. “Roubini started predicting a recession four years ago and saying it was imminent. He kept changing his justification: first the trade deficit, the current account deficit, then the oil price spike, then the housing downturn and so on. But the recession actually did not arrive,” he said.

“If you are an investor or a businessman and you took him seriously four years ago, what on earth would happen to you? You would be in a foetal position for years. This is why the timing is critical. It’s not enough to know what will happen in some point in the distant future.”

Roubini says the argument about content and timing is irrelevant. “People who have been totally blinded and wrong accusing me of getting the timing wrong, it’s just a joke,” he said. “It’s a bit pathetic, frankly. I was not making generic statements. I have made very specific predictions and I have been right all along.” Maybe so, but he does not sound too happy about it, frankly.

Money Central: Ten people who predicted the financial crisis

Dr. Doom predicted the economic crisis

By STEPHEN MIHM — New York Times — Aug. 15, 2008

 

On Sept. 7, 2006, Nouriel Roubini, an economics professor at New York University, stood before an audience of economists at the International Monetary Fund and announced that a crisis was brewing. In the coming months and years, he warned, the United States was likely to face a once-in-a-lifetime housing bust, an oil shock, sharply declining consumer confidence and, ultimately, a deep recession. He laid out a bleak sequence of events: homeowners defaulting on mortgages, trillions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities unraveling worldwide and the global financial system shuddering to a halt. These developments, he went on, could cripple or destroy hedge funds, investment banks and other major financial institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The audience seemed skeptical, even dismissive. As Roubini stepped down from the lectern after his talk, the moderator of the event quipped, “I think perhaps we will need a stiff drink after that.” People laughed — and not without reason. At the time, unemployment and inflation remained low, and the economy, while weak, was still growing, despite rising oil prices and a softening housing market. And then there was the espouser of doom himself: Roubini was known to be a perpetual pessimist, what economists call a “permabear.” When the economist Anirvan Banerji delivered his response to Roubini’s talk, he noted that Roubini’s predictions did not make use of mathematical models and dismissed his hunches as those of a career naysayer.

But Roubini was soon vindicated. In the year that followed, subprime lenders began entering bankruptcy, hedge funds began going under and the stock market plunged. There was declining employment, a deteriorating dollar, ever-increasing evidence of a huge housing bust and a growing air of panic in financial markets as the credit crisis deepened. By late summer, the Federal Reserve was rushing to the rescue, making the first of many unorthodox interventions in the economy, including cutting the lending rate by 50 basis points and buying up tens of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities. When Roubini returned to the I.M.F. last September, he delivered a second talk, predicting a growing crisis of solvency that would infect every sector of the financial system. This time, no one laughed. “He sounded like a madman in 2006,” recalls the I.M.F. economist Prakash Loungani, who invited Roubini on both occasions. “He was a prophet when he returned in 2007.”

Over the past year, whenever optimists have declared the worst of the economic crisis behind us, Roubini has countered with steadfast pessimism. In February, when the conventional wisdom held that the venerable investment firms of Wall Street would weather the crisis, Roubini warned that one or more of them would go “belly up” — and six weeks later, Bear Stearns collapsed. Following the Fed’s further extraordinary actions in the spring — including making lines of credit available to selected investment banks and brokerage houses — many economists made note of the ensuing economic rally and proclaimed the credit crisis over and a recession averted. Roubini, who dismissed the rally as nothing more than a “delusional complacency” encouraged by a “bunch of self-serving spinmasters,” stuck to his script of “nightmare” events: waves of corporate bankrupticies, collapses in markets like commercial real estate and municipal bonds and, most alarming, the possible bankruptcy of a large regional or national bank that would trigger a panic by depositors. Not all of these developments have come to pass (and perhaps never will), but the demise last month of the California bank IndyMac — one of the largest such failures in U.S. history — drew only more attention to Roubini’s seeming prescience.

As a result, Roubini, a respected but formerly obscure academic, has become a major figure in the public debate about the economy: the seer who saw it coming. He has been summoned to speak before Congress, the Council on Foreign Relations and the World Economic Forum at Davos. He is now a sought-after adviser, spending much of his time shuttling between meetings with central bank governors and finance ministers in Europe and Asia. Though he continues to issue colorful doomsday prophecies of a decidedly nonmainstream sort — especially on his popular and polemical blog, where he offers visions of “equity market slaughter” and the “Coming Systemic Bust of the U.S. Banking System” — the mainstream economic establishment appears to be moving closer, however fitfully, to his way of seeing things. “I have in the last few months become more pessimistic than the consensus,” the former Treasury secretary Lawrence Summers told me earlier this year. “Certainly, Nouriel’s writings have been a contributor to that.”

On a cold and dreary day last winter, I met Roubini over lunch in the TriBeCa neighborhood of New York City. “I’m not a pessimist by nature,” he insisted. “I’m not someone who sees things in a bleak way.” Just looking at him, I found the assertion hard to credit. With a dour manner and an aura of gloom about him, Roubini gives the impression of being permanently pained, as if the burden of what he knows is almost too much for him to bear. He rarely smiles, and when he does, his face, topped by an unruly mop of brown hair, contorts into something more closely resembling a grimace.

When I pressed him on his claim that he wasn’t pessimistic, he paused for a moment and then relented a little. “I have more concerns about potential risks and vulnerabilities than most people,” he said, with glum understatement. But these concerns, he argued, make him more of a realist than a pessimist and put him in the role of the cleareyed outsider — unsettling complacency and puncturing pieties.

Roubini, who is 50, has been an outsider his entire life. He was born in Istanbul, the child of Iranian Jews, and his family moved to Tehran when he was 2, then to Tel Aviv and finally to Italy, where he grew up and attended college. He moved to the United States to pursue his doctorate in international economics at Harvard. Along the way he became fluent in Farsi, Hebrew, Italian and English. His accent, an inimitable polyglot growl, radiates a weariness that comes with being what he calls a “global nomad.”

As a graduate student at Harvard, Roubini was an unusual talent, according to his adviser, the Columbia economist Jeffrey Sachs. He was as comfortable in the world of arcane mathematics as he was studying political and economic institutions. “It’s a mix of skills that rarely comes packaged in one person,” Sachs told me. After completing his Ph.D. in 1988, Roubini joined the economics department at Yale, where he first met and began sharing ideas with Robert Shiller, the economist now known for his prescient warnings about the 1990s tech bubble.

The ’90s were an eventful time for an international economist like Roubini. Throughout the decade, one emerging economy after another was beset by crisis, beginning with Mexico’s in 1994. Panics swept Asia, including Thailand, Indonesia and Korea, in 1997 and 1998. The economies of Brazil and Russia imploded in 1998. Argentina’s followed in 2000. Roubini began studying these countries and soon identified what he saw as their common weaknesses. On the eve of the crises that befell them, he noticed, most had huge current-account deficits (meaning, basically, that they spent far more than they made), and they typically financed these deficits by borrowing from abroad in ways that exposed them to the national equivalent of bank runs. Most of these countries also had poorly regulated banking systems plagued by excessive borrowing and reckless lending. Corporate governance was often weak, with cronyism in abundance.

Roubini’s work was distinguished not only by his conclusions but also by his approach. By making extensive use of transnational comparisons and historical analogies, he was employing a subjective, nontechnical framework, the sort embraced by popular economists like the Times Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz in order to reach a nonacademic audience. Roubini takes pains to note that he remains a rigorous scholarly economist — “When I weigh evidence,” he told me, “I’m drawing on 20 years of accumulated experience using models” — but his approach is not the contemporary scholarly ideal in which an economist builds a model in order to constrain his subjective impressions and abide by a discrete set of data. As Shiller told me, “Nouriel has a different way of seeing things than most economists: he gets into everything.”

Roubini likens his style to that of a policy maker like Alan Greenspan, the former Fed chairman who was said (perhaps apocryphally) to pore over vast quantities of technical economic data while sitting in the bathtub, looking to sniff out where the economy was headed. Roubini also cites, as a more ideologically congenial example, the sweeping, cosmopolitan approach of the legendary economist John Maynard Keynes, whom Roubini, with only slight exaggeration, calls “the most brilliant economist who never wrote down an equation.” The book that Roubini ultimately wrote (with the economist Brad Setser) on the emerging market crises, “Bailouts or Bail-Ins?” contains not a single equation in its 400-plus pages.

After analyzing the markets that collapsed in the ’90s, Roubini set out to determine which country’s economy would be the next to succumb to the same pressures. His surprising answer: the United States’. “The United States,” Roubini remembers thinking, “looked like the biggest emerging market of all.” Of course, the United States wasn’t an emerging market; it was (and still is) the largest economy in the world. But Roubini was unnerved by what he saw in the U.S. economy, in particular its 2004 current-account deficit of $600 billion. He began writing extensively about the dangers of that deficit and then branched out, researching the various effects of the credit boom — including the biggest housing bubble in the nation’s history — that began after the Federal Reserve cut rates to close to zero in 2003. Roubini became convinced that the housing bubble was going to pop.

By late 2004 he had started to write about a “nightmare hard landing scenario for the United States.” He predicted that foreign investors would stop financing the fiscal and current-account deficit and abandon the dollar, wreaking havoc on the economy. He said that these problems, which he called the “twin financial train wrecks,” might manifest themselves in 2005 or, at the latest, 2006. “You have been warned here first,” he wrote ominously on his blog. But by the end of 2006, the train wrecks hadn’t occurred.

Recessions are signal events in any modern economy. And yet remarkably, the profession of economics is quite bad at predicting them. A recent study looked at “consensus forecasts” (the predictions of large groups of economists) that were made in advance of 60 different national recessions that hit around the world in the ’90s: in 97 percent of the cases, the study found, the economists failed to predict the coming contraction a year in advance. On those rare occasions when economists did successfully predict recessions, they significantly underestimated the severity of the downturns. Worse, many of the economists failed to anticipate recessions that occurred as soon as two months later.

The dismal science, it seems, is an optimistic profession. Many economists, Roubini among them, argue that some of the optimism is built into the very machinery, the mathematics, of modern economic theory. Econometric models typically rely on the assumption that the near future is likely to be similar to the recent past, and thus it is rare that the models anticipate breaks in the economy. And if the models can’t foresee a relatively minor break like a recession, they have even more trouble modeling and predicting a major rupture like a full-blown financial crisis. Only a handful of 20th-century economists have even bothered to study financial panics. (The most notable example is probably the late economist Hyman Minksy, of whom Roubini is an avid reader.) “These are things most economists barely understand,” Roubini told me. “We’re in uncharted territory where standard economic theory isn’t helpful.”

True though this may be, Roubini’s critics do not agree that his approach is any more accurate. Anirvan Banerji, the economist who challenged Roubini’s first I.M.F. talk, points out that Roubini has been peddling pessimism for years; Banerji contends that Roubini’s apparent foresight is nothing more than an unhappy coincidence of events. “Even a stopped clock is right twice a day,” he told me. “The justification for his bearish call has evolved over the years,” Banerji went on, ticking off the different reasons that Roubini has used to justify his predictions of recessions and crises: rising trade deficits, exploding current-account deficits, Hurricane Katrina, soaring oil prices. All of Roubini’s predictions, Banerji observed, have been based on analogies with past experience. “This forecasting by analogy is a tempting thing to do,” he said. “But you have to pick the right analogy. The danger of this more subjective approach is that instead of letting the objective facts shape your views, you will choose the facts that confirm your existing views.”

Kenneth Rogoff, an economist at Harvard who has known Roubini for decades, told me that he sees great value in Roubini’s willingness to entertain possible situations that are far outside the consensus view of most economists. “If you’re sitting around at the European Central Bank,” he said, “and you’re asking what’s the worst thing that could happen, the first thing people will say is, ‘Let’s see what Nouriel says.’ ” But Rogoff cautioned against equating that skill with forecasting. Roubini, in other words, might be the kind of economist you want to consult about the possibility of the collapse of the municipal-bond market, but he is not necessarily the kind you ask to predict, say, the rise in global demand for paper clips.

His defenders contend that Roubini is not unduly pessimistic. Jeffrey Sachs, his former adviser, told me that “if the underlying conditions call for optimism, Nouriel would be optimistic.” And to be sure, Roubini is capable of being optimistic — or at least of steering clear of absolute worst-case prognostications. He agrees, for example, with the conventional economic wisdom that oil will drop below $100 a barrel in the coming months as global demand weakens. “I’m not comfortable saying that we’re going to end up in the Great Depression,” he told me. “I’m a reasonable person.”

What economic developments does Roubini see on the horizon? And what does he think we should do about them? The first step, he told me in a recent conversation, is to acknowledge the extent of the problem. “We are in a recession, and denying it is nonsense,” he said. When Jim Nussle, the White House budget director, announced last month that the nation had “avoided a recession,” Roubini was incredulous. For months, he has been predicting that the United States will suffer through an 18-month recession that will eventually rank as the “worst since the Great Depression.” Though he is confident that the economy will enter a technical recovery toward the end of next year, he says that job losses, corporate bankruptcies and other drags on growth will continue to take a toll for years.

Roubini has counseled various policy makers, including Federal Reserve governors and senior Treasury Department officials, to mount an aggressive response to the crisis. He applauded when the Federal Reserve cut interest rates to 2 percent from 5.25 percent beginning last summer. He also supported the Fed’s willingness to engineer a takeover of Bear Stearns. Roubini argues that the Fed’s actions averted catastrophe, though he says he believes that future bailouts should focus on mortgage owners, not investors. Accordingly, he sees the choice facing the United States as stark but simple: either the government backs up a trillion-plus dollars’ worth of high-risk mortgages (in exchange for the lenders’ agreement to reduce monthly mortgage payments), or the banks and other institutions holding those mortgages — or the complex securities derived from them — go under. “You either nationalize the banks or you nationalize the mortgages,” he said. “Otherwise, they’re all toast.”

For months Roubini has been arguing that the true cost of the housing crisis will not be a mere $300 billion — the amount allowed for by the housing legislation sponsored by Representative Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd — but something between a trillion and a trillion and a half dollars. But most important, in Roubini’s opinion, is to realize that the problem is deeper than the housing crisis. “Reckless people have deluded themselves that this was a subprime crisis,” he told me. “But we have problems with credit-card debt, student-loan debt, auto loans, commercial real estate loans, home-equity loans, corporate debt and loans that financed leveraged buyouts.” All of these forms of debt, he argues, suffer from some or all of the same traits that first surfaced in the housing market: shoddy underwriting, securitization, negligence on the part of the credit-rating agencies and lax government oversight. “We have a subprime financial system,” he said, “not a subprime mortgage market.”

Roubini argues that most of the losses from this bad debt have yet to be written off, and the toll from bad commercial real estate loans alone may help send hundreds of local banks into the arms of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. “A good third of the regional banks won’t make it,” he predicted. In turn, these bailouts will add hundreds of billions of dollars to an already gargantuan federal debt, and someone, somewhere, is going to have to finance that debt, along with all the other debt accumulated by consumers and corporations. “Our biggest financiers are China, Russia and the gulf states,” Roubini noted. “These are rivals, not allies.”

The United States, Roubini went on, will likely muddle through the crisis but will emerge from it a different nation, with a different place in the world. “Once you run current-account deficits, you depend on the kindness of strangers,” he said, pausing to let out a resigned sigh. “This might be the beginning of the end of the American empire.”

Stephen Mihm, an assistant professor of economic history at the University of Georgia, is the author of “A Nation of Counterfeiters: Capitalists, Con Men and the Making of the United States.” His last feature article for the magazine was about North Korean counterfeiting.

UK: House Rents Fall

by CalculatedRisk — 11/17/2008

From The Times: House rents fall as unsold properties flood market (hat tip James)

Rents fell for the first time in five years between July and October as home-movers flooded the rental market with properties that they could not sell.
…
It is the first time since 2003 that the gauge of rental yields has turned negative. James Scott-Lee, of RICS, said: “Many vendors have been forced to become amateur landlords, creating an inevitable downward pressure on rents.”

Usually in a recession some people double up with friends or family – and that puts downward pressure on rents. This time there is also a huge number of “amateur landlords” renting out their unsold properties, and that is additional downward pressure on rents.

This is also happening in the U.S., see: Apartment Market Weakens

As economy sinks, officials fear violent solutions

(AP) — CNN — October 2008

An out-of-work money manager in California loses a fortune and wipes out his family in a murder-suicide.

A 90-year-old Ohio widow shoots herself in the chest as authorities arrive to evict her from the modest house she called home for 38 years.

In Massachusetts, a housewife who had hidden her family’s mounting financial crisis from her husband sends a note to the mortgage company warning: “By the time you foreclose on my house, I’ll be dead.” Then Carlene Balderrama shot herself to death, leaving an insurance policy and a suicide note on a table.

Across the country, authorities are becoming concerned that the nation’s financial woes could turn increasingly violent, and they are urging people to get help. In some places, mental-health hot lines are jammed, counseling services are in high demand and domestic-violence shelters are full.

“I’ve had a number of people say that this is the thing most reminiscent of 9/11 that’s happened here since then,” said the Rev. Canon Ann Malonee, vicar at Trinity Church in the heart of New York’s financial district. “It’s that sense of having the rug pulled out from under them.”

With nowhere else to turn, many people are calling suicide-prevention hot lines. The Samaritans of New York have seen calls rise more than 16 percent in the past year, many of them money-related. The Switchboard of Miami has recorded more than 500 foreclosure-related calls this year.

“A lot of people are telling us they are losing everything. They’re losing their homes, they’re going into foreclosure, they’ve lost their jobs,” said Virginia Cervasio, executive director of a suicide resource enter in southwest Florida’s Lee County.

But tragedies keep mounting:

• In Los Angeles, California, last week, a former money manager fatally shot his wife, three sons and his mother-in-law before killing himself.

Karthik Rajaram, 45, left a suicide note saying he was in financial trouble and contemplated killing just himself. But he said he decided to kill his entire family because that was more honorable, police said.

After the murder-suicide, police and mental-health officials in Los Angeles took the unusual step of urging people to seek help for themselves or loved ones if they feel overwhelmed by grim financial news. They said they were specifically afraid of the “copycat phenomenon.”

“This is a perfect American family behind me that has absolutely been destroyed, apparently because of a man who just got stuck in a rabbit hole, if you will, of absolute despair,” Deputy Police Chief Michel Moore said. “It is critical to step up and recognize we are in some pretty troubled times.”

• In Tennessee, a woman fatally shot herself last week as sheriff’s deputies went to evict her from her foreclosed home.

Pamela Ross, 57, and her husband were fighting foreclosure on their home when sheriff’s deputies in Sevierville came to serve an eviction notice. They were across the street when they heard a gunshot and found Ross dead from a wound to the chest. The case was even more tragic because the couple had recently been granted an extra 10 days to appeal.

• In Akron, Ohio, the 90-year-old widow who shot herself on Oct. 1 is recovering. A congressman told Addie Polk’s story on the House floor before lawmakers voted to approve a $700 billion financial rescue package. Mortgage finance company Fannie Mae dropped the foreclosure, forgave her mortgage and said she could remain in the home.

• In Ocala, Florida, Roland Gore shot his wife and dog in March and then set fire to the couple’s home, which had been in foreclosure, before killing himself. His case was one of several in which people killed spouses or pets, destroyed property or attacked police before taking their own lives.

“The financial stress builds up to the point the person feels they can’t go on, and the person believes their family is better off dead than left without a financial support,” said Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Washington D.C.-based Violence Policy Center.

Dr. Edward Charlesworth, a clinical psychologist in Houston, Texas, said the current crisis is breeding a sense of chronic anxiety among people who feel helpless and panic-stricken, as well as angry that their government has let them down.

“They feel like in this great society that we live in we should have more protection for the individuals rather than just the corporation,” he said.

It’s not yet clear there is a statistical link between suicides and the financial downturn since there is generally a two-year lag in national suicide figures. But historically, suicides increase in times of economic hardship. And the current financial crisis is already being called the worst since the Great Depression.

Counselors at Catholic Charities USA report seeing a “significant increase” in the need for housing counseling.

One mental health counselor said half of her clients were on some form of antidepressant or anti-anxiety medication. The agency has seen a decrease in overall funding, but it has expanded foreclosure counseling and received nearly $2 million for such services in late 2007.

Adding to financially tense households is an air of secrecy. Experts said it’s common for one spouse to blame the other for their financial mess or to hide it entirely, as Balderrama did.

After falling 31/2 years behind in payments, the Taunton, Massachusetts, housewife had been intercepting letters from the mortgage company and shredding them before her husband saw them. She tried to refinance but was declined.

In July, on the day the house was to be auctioned, she faxed the note to the mortgage company. Then the 52-year-old walked outside, shot her three beloved cats and then herself with her husband’s rifle.

Notes left on the table revealed months of planning. She’d picked out her funeral home, laid out the insurance policy and left a note saying, “pay off the house with the insurance money.”

“She put in her suicide note that it got overwhelming for her,” said her husband, John Balderrama. “Apparently she didn’t have anyone to talk to. She didn’t come to me. I don’t know why. There’s gotta be some help out there for people that are hurting, (something better) than to see somebody lose a life over a stupid house.”

As economy sinks, officials fear violent solutions – CNN.com

And You Thought 1931 Was Bad for the Market

By FLOYD NORRIS — New York Times — Published: November 21, 2008

THIS is shaping up as the year when almost nothing went up.

Even after Friday’s large stock market rally, only 10 of the stocks in the Standard & Poor’s 500, the premier American stock index, are higher than they were at the end of 2007, and the index itself is down almost as far as it was in the worst year it ever experienced, at the height of the Great Depression.

Although the accompanying charts focus on the United States, similar things can be said in most markets. Only a handful of European stocks are up this year, and within the once buoyant Chinese and Indian stock markets, there are almost no stocks showing gains.

There has, in other words, been nowhere to hide from the collapse of 2008.

The ubiquity of the problems reflects how integrated the international financial system has become, as well as the fact that most of the world is now in recession or getting close to it.

Moreover, many asset prices were pumped up in years past by excessive debt, and are now falling as many investors choose to, or are forced to, reduce their borrowing.

Standard & Poor’s has been keeping statistics on the breadth of the 500 stocks in the index only since 1980. Until now, 2001 was the worst year on record in that regard, when just 131 of them rose. But unless there is a substantial year-end rally, that figure could be 10 times the one for 2008.

One measure of the depth of the market malaise is that there are as many stocks in the S.& P. 500 that have declined by 90 percent this year — 10 — as there are stocks that have risen at all. Several of the winners, among them Rohm & Haas, the chemical company, and UST, the maker of snuff tobacco, are up only because they agreed to all-cash takeovers early in the year. Their acquirers are down sharply.

So far this month, the figures are little better. Just 24 of the stocks in the index are up. S.& P. has been keeping track of the monthly figures only since 1999. Until this year, the lowest number rising in a month was 56 in September 2002 — just before the last bear market ended. That number was challenged in September of this year, when 65 rose, and shattered last month, when just 28 of the 500 stocks showed gains.

The S.& P. 500 has lost more than a third of its value in a calendar year only twice before, both during the Great Depression. It fell 41.9 percent in 1931, and 38.6 percent in 1937. The worst post-Depression year, until now, was 1974, when the index fell 29.7 percent amid the worst postwar recession the country has yet seen.

But this year, the index is down 45.5 percent. Amazingly enough, it has done better than leading indexes in many other countries, at least when currency changes are filtered out.

Measured in dollars, the leading indexes in Britain, France, Germany, Canada, China, India, Australia, Brazil and Mexico have all lost more than half their value. Japan’s leading index is down almost 50 percent in yen, but just 40 percent in dollars because of the rise of the yen this year.

Floyd Norris comments on finance and economics in his blog at nytimes.com/norris.

Investor Warns Dollar Rally Coming to an End

President of Euro Pacific Capital tells CNBC’s ‘Fast Money’ recent rally in U.S. dollar unsustainable, will soon collapse
By Jeff Poor — Business & Media Institute — 11/21/2008
Watch Video

U.S. monetary policy does have consequences. Regardless of the current rally, and despite government intervention, the value of the U.S. dollar is still at stake, according to one investing expert.

 

Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital and an outspoken opponent of all the government intervention in the marketplace, warned the dollar is highly susceptible to collapse. Over the past year, the value of the dollar has rallied a little over 17 percent – but it’s a faux rally, according to Schiff. 

 

“The dollar is rallying for the same reason that real estate rallied or that dot coms rallied – it’s not because of the fundamentals,” Schiff said. “It’s temporary. You know, you see a lot in the market. Sometimes there’s a head-fake, you get a news item of the day – you see a move and then the real move is in the other direction. You got to fade this rally in the dollar. It can’t last.”

 

According to Schiff, the U.S. currency will collapse once foreign central banks let go of dollars they’re hoarding in the midst of the financial crisis.

 

“Once this rally is exhausted, the dollar is going to collapse,” Schiff added. “Look at the trillions and trillions of dollars being hoarded by central banks. Look at China, announcing they want to do this $600 billion stimulus package. How do you think they’re going to finance it? They’re going to sell treasuries. They’re going to stop lending us money.”

 

Schiff maintained American behavior and federal government policy decisions will discourage other nations from lending to the United States.

 

“The world has learned a valuable message and that’s don’t lend Americans any more money.”

 

Although there has been little discussion of the dollar as other investments have fallen in recent months, Gerald O’Driscoll Jr., a senior fellow at the CATO Institute, had a similar analysis of the dollar. He told a panel at CATO’s 26th Annual Monetary Conference the dollar was currently trading in a bubble.

Three Bear Markets in Two Months

By: Financial Futures and Equity Market Analysis   
Friday, November 21, 2008 2:02 PM

This is not the story of the three little bears. This is the story of a stock market crash, the like of which has been far worse than anything seen since 1929-1932. The generally accepted definition about bear markets is that the stock market has to decline 20% or more to qualify. Under that definition, we have seen 3 bear markets condensed into two months.

It is worth noting the the financial system was the epicenter of the first two bear markets following lawmakers Sept 18 proposal to permanently fix the foreclosure crisis with their “No Bank Left Behind” Act. The Plan was so ill-conceived and badly botched, the stock market fell 35% in 15 days and then another 22% in 9 days. The bear market declines feel at a rate greater than 2% a day.

Mitsubishi got a capital injection on October 27 (from the Bank of Japan I believe) and the stock market rallied into the Nov 4 election. The failure of the financial system in September and October, however had spread to the real economy. Banks would not lend, and funding day to day operations came to a halt. It is said that in October 2008, global commerce virtually collapsed throughout the world. The epicenter of the crisis had shifted to the real economy in November.

By November, it became clear the US auto industry was on the brink of bankruptcy, and the CEO’s of the Big Three automakers literally flew hat in hand to Capitol Hill in their private jets ~ begging for taxpayer money. Congress was not amused, and on Nov 19-20 refused their request for $25 billion. Instead lawmakers told the Big Three CEO’s to come back on December 2nd with a Plan that would be viable to get them through the storm.

So far the market is down 22% in 9 days since the Nov 4 election high. Again the rate of change of the post-election high was greater than 2%. Corporate credit spreads are at record levels not seen since 1932 and 1938. Risk of corporate defaults/failure is about one in five, according to my sources. The good news for the broad market is that this 1932 and 1938 marked bear market lows when credit spreads were last so high. The downside is that a lot of companies are slated to die, and unemployment is going to go significantly higher. For the real economy over the next one to three years, that is going to suck. And at some point, these heightened risks real economy could infect the stock market again, and create even lower lows than the ones we are now setting ~ eventually.

Now, should the automakers return to Capitol Hill with a viable plan that can be rubber-stamped by Congress on December 2, this would go quite a long way to shoring up investor confidence. An approved plan means the corporate credit spreads would narrow, and the risk of one in five companies going bankrupt would diminish and the number of projected jobs lost will decline. In the auto-related industries alone, 2.5 million jobs would be at risk if the automakers went bankrupt.

The one thing a politician must do to ensure his or her job is to create jobs or not lose them, especially on Main Street. They therefore have a high interest in doing something for the automakers. Our lawmakers will put up or shut up on Dec 2, and I am betting they put up. That said, risks to the broad market will remain to the downside without a resolution to the auto crisis. My target for the SP500 is 698-700 in the first two weeks of December.

Dubai to launch silver ETF

By Melissa Pistilli-Exclusive to Silver Investing News

The Dubai Multi Commodities Center (DMCC) is set to launch an Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) for silver next month, according to financial journalist Peter J. Cooper.  Cooper is a financial journalist out of Dubai Media City and is well-versed in Middle Eastern business and finance. His book Opportunity Dubai was published this month.

Demand for physical silver is high in Dubai according to Cooper, who says local bullion dealers, after exhausting closer sources, are flying silver bars into Dubai from all over the world in order to meet demand.  In the last few years, “the DMCC has successfully established itself as a regional hub for commodities trading . . . and has its own swanky new business park with its gold, silver and diamond towers,” said Cooper.

In January this year, the Noor Islamic Bank based in Dubai announced plans to become the world’s largest Islamic bank within the next five years by spending upwards of $1 billion on acquisitions in Europe, Asia, North Africa, and the Middle East. Currently, Noor is 25 per cent owned by the Dubai government and 25 per cent by the emirate’s ruler Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who is also the Prime Minister and Vice President of the United Arab Emirates.

Dubai, which interestingly was once the center for gold smuggling to India thirty years ago, is now home to about 20 per cent of the global physical gold trade. The UAE member has long been an established market for gold jewelry and bullion.   A tax free center for commodities traders, the emirate will soon be site of the Middle East’s first gold ETF this fourth quarter.

“Details of the silver ETF are being kept under wraps for the launch but the plans seem at a advanced stage,” said Cooper. The gold and silver ETFs will no doubt have to comply with Sharia law, which prohibits charging interest as it is a form of usury, and bans investments in businesses connected to alcohol or gambling.

The silver ETF price will of course be determined by the spot price for physical silver, which is much lower than the high premiums many are paying for physical silver. The advantage to investors is the ability to get into the silver market at low prices and also the opportunity to “profit from the leverage silver offers to the gold price,” Cooper said.

Cooper has merely hinted at a connection between Dubai’s silver ETF and 1970’s Hunt Brothers. “Will the new Dubai silver ETF have a big enough impact on the tiny global silver market to send prices higher like the Hunt Brothers did in the late 1970s when they cornered the market? Well, nothing succeeds like success and a silver ETF in Dubai looks like the right product in the right place at the right time.”

However, The International Forecaster’s Bob Chapman is more blunt. “The Dubai silver ETF may pick up where the Hunt Brothers left off.” Chapman, who was once owner of one of the largest gold and silver brokerage firms in the 70s and 80s sees Dubai’s silver ETF launch as a calculated move toward cornering the silver market much like the Hunt Brothers did. “The sheikhs may well have decided to go after the silver market.
“What may be happening here is that the OPEC nations, and possibly also Russia, are setting up a counterbalance against the collapse of oil prices,” he said.  Chapman has often railed about sovereign wealth funds in the oil-rich Middle East manipulating precious metals prices up whenever the oil price was hammered by who he calls the “Illuminist manipulators.”  He believes the OPEC nations are once again truing to send the message, “you leave oil alone, or we will send gold and silver to the moon and expose your destruction of the US economy by killing the canaries in the coal mines, thus ringing the gold and silver alarm bells loud and clear.”

Chapman sees the Dubai silver ETF as one way in which the OPEC nations are gearing up to take advantage of what just might be “the greatest opportunity to corner a commodity market in the history of the world.”  Chapman asks his readers to picture what may happen if COMEX gold and silver are “funneled” into Dubai’s new ETFs. He argues that because there is only about one billion ounces of above-ground silver stocks and given that silver is “trading at a ridiculous sub- 10″ it would  be so easy for the “wealthy oil sheikhs and their sovereign wealth funds” to buy up all the above-ground silver.  Chapman believes both oil and silver prices are bound to surge higher. “We should soon see $80 to $100 oil and $15 to $20 silver.”

11/20/2008

Will the U.S. default on it’s debt in 2009?