Bad things often happen to good people, but why would anyone take advice from a guy who is bankrupt? Lenny Dykstra famously lost his house and fortune last year in a very public bankruptcy and at one point the judge ordered a trustee to take control of Dykstra’s assets because Lenny seemed a bit, um, well, aloof. Lenny claimed that he got bad advice from a mortgage broker and was a victim of fraud. I do not know if the allegations are true or not, but one thing I do know is that you do not buy a house you cannot afford, he clearly could not afford it, and then claim fraud.
Lenny famously wrote for the TheStreet.com under the watchful (?) eye of Jim Cramer who had nothing but praise for Lenny. That is, of course, right up until his bankruptcy hearing when he was quickly and quietly let go from Cramer’s outfit. You would think after such a public display of horrors Lenny would simply just go away to rebuild his life somewhere, but that is not to be. Apparently Dykstra decided that he needs to get back up on that horse and has started a website to sell his top picks.
The service for Lenny’s top picks range from $899 to $1548 a year, depending if you pay monthly or all upfront. For this service you get access to Lenny and a signed baseball as a value add proposition, ever hear of Ebay? Regardless, his website mainly brags about his baseball achievements and his prowess as a deep in the money option player, but you have to pay to find out how good he is. What his site leave out is the facts regarding his own personal financial problems.
While I could never hold a personal financial issue over someone’s head or a string of bad luck, maybe he was a victim of fraud, but to omit such information is sketchy to me. If he was so good at picking winners, he boasts a track record of 140-0, how could you lose your home? I honestly wish Lenny the best, but why anyone would trust his picks or why he would omit his public financial problems is just dirty pool, in my opinion. Everyone is entitled to make a living doing what they do best and, in this case, perhaps Lenny should go back to something baseball related instead.
Everyone remembers the aftermath of 9/11/01 and how horrible those days were, but what sticks out in my mind, after the obvious, was what happened after words. The President said to get out and shop, and boy did we, but the thing most do not recall is what the auto industry did to boost sales, 0% financing. This was the beginning of the end for the auto industry simply because how can you ever raise financing costs after you go to 0%. The demand that 0% financing created meant that the automakers would have a heck of a time raising those rates and they needed the sales. It essentially created a major problem for the industry which help speed its way into bankruptcy.
We are seeing the same thing happen in housing with all the government help being injected into the market. We have tax credits to encourage buying, but we also see what the market looks like without those credits, see recent home sales data, and we have the Fed lowering mortgage rates like mad with QE. What happens when/if these programs stop? It will get ugly, just like when the automakers tried to stop 0% financing. If you do not let the markets work their magic, i.e. stop malinvestments, the pain is just prolonged. GM and Chrysler should have gone out of business a few years ago but that 0% financing helped keep them around, however it could not stop the inevitable.
The mistakes made by the automakers are being made by the government with the housing market. Homeowners already enjoy a ton of tax breaks, mortgage interest deductions, property tax deductions, etc. and the last thing they really needed was a tax credit to buy a home. It has helped, the data shows that, but the problem is these programs have to end and then what happens? As we have seen already, with limited data of course, is that housing does not move without that tax credit. Sure we can blame the weather or whatever external force we want, but that is ignoring the obvious, housing wants to go lower. That leads me to believe that more tax credits are on the way and QE is a permanent fixture at the Fed, see Japan.
When you incentivize buying to such a degree you create a major problem for yourself, or the country in this case, as you boost expectations on false hope. Once you remove those incentives and reality sets in you are stuck with doing nothing, clearly something government does not want to do now, or let the market sort things out, what should happen. Because the government has created false hope for a housing recovery they have created more problems than they solved. The sales we do see now are false demand, meaning it is only there because of the rich incentives, which means that many economists and market participants are creating strategies or projections around numbers that are not real. The fact is that without a natural housing recovery the economy cannot recover.
While the insane 0% financing hastened the decline of the automakers into bankruptcy, in my opinion, the government is simply slowing the fall of housing or kicking the can down the road a bit. The good news is that at least the incentives will not cause the government to go into bankruptcy, well on their own at least, but it is an enormous waste of money. The government should step back and stop what they are doing and the Fed needs to stop its QE program. If neither stop and they continue doing this the next leg down will be ugly and, the reality is, we do not need more incentives to buy houses, look at the tax breaks you get now. False demand creates false hope which lures investors into investments they ordinarily would not buy. When that false demand and hope disappear those investments decline in value, investors are being suckered.
I guess a few firms had to be to Scrooge given the 452K initial claims we saw this morning. Anyone expecting a larger number than we got is crazy because companies just do not or try not to fire people around the holidays. In fact, I am shocked that we saw claims as high as we saw today which reinforces my thought that the employment picture is not getting any better, I know I wouldn’t know a V shaped recovery if it hit me in the head because employment is a lagging indicator. That would be true for an inventory recession, but not for a credit collapse or do I have my type of recessions mixed up?
These initial claims and the ISM data is still not consistent with the magical -11K employment report we got in November, sorry for being a doubter. I simply do not trust government data and neither should you because the BLS along with this administration, any administration for that matter, will do anything to make themselves look better. For example, even though banks are not lending the BLS insists that 30K people started their own businesses in November, really, that is what the birth/death model says. Go back a year ago when things were really bad and the numbers are even higher, 100K+ people were starting their own businesses when the credit markets were frozen solid, so trust those BLS numbers all you want, I don’t.
To further illustrate this point, last month the BLS reduced the number of people in the work force by some 130K, they just took them out of the work force, why? Because they gave up looking for a job, or could not find one, and that is how you get a -11K employment report and massively revised prior reports. I wish we could all doctor our books like the government as we would all be rich. However, did you hear Steve Liesman tell you about how the BLS removed people from the workforce? Nope, you did not. Santelli told you about it and Santelli told you about how retail sales were doctored, but none of the other talking heads, why? I don’t have an answer, I really want to know why. I get that no one wants all bad news all the time, even I don’t want that, but I do want the truth.
My point is that last week and this week we will see soft initial claims numbers and December’s employment report will probably be OK, unless they doctor it up again. If they doctor the report, which will be unnecessary, it will be spectacular and completely unbelievable which will be the problem. Moving forward credibility will be an issue for the government, kind of like the USSR in the 1980’s when they said everything was fine and we knew it wasn’t, we are trying to do the same freaking thing. The thing is when 20% of the population is unemployed/underemployed, 1 out of 5 people, you cannot lie your way out of that and you will pay through the elections. This AM on Squawk even Liesman finally admitted that the Bush “economic recovery” was very poor and we are right where we were at the beginning of the decade. We need massive job growth, 300K+ a month now to turn this around and that is not going to happen.
The economy is bad and without government intervention there is no green shoots, period. The housing data yesterday proves that because that was the first look at housing starts without the tax credit, starts were down 11% when expectations were for +6%, ouch. That is quantifiable proof that the private sector is doing nothing right now and it is 110% government intervention growing the economy which has zero multiplier effect, it actually destroys wealth especially when your country has to borrow 100% of the money. That one data point on its own destroys the V shapers story, but if you combine it with any other data point it completely buries it. Let us not forget that if this was a V shape the Fed would have at least changed its language during the last meeting, but nope they did not even do that. Keep in mind I want out of this to, but I am just not delusional. Sure stocks are higher, but that doesn’t mean the economy is OK and in fact it means there is pain coming hard and fast somewhere along the way. Oh, where’s the volume?
Just how bad are things? Well, banks aren’t lending to the wealthy either. I spoke to a very wealthy friend of mine yesterday in Florida which is telling of what is really going on in the mortgage market right now. Now, I know how lending works, but there is simply no excuse for what he is going through right now in trying to refinance his condo in Florida, I know it is a hard hit area, but hear out the story before passing judgment. His condo was worth 7 figures before, but now in the high 6 figures and he has zero debt, $2M in cash, 790 FICO score and he is self employed. Now his self employed status is an issue because he has inconsistent income, $40K a year to $400K a year which is wild swings, but not bad considering he only wants to refinance $200K.
Here is the thing, he cannot get any financing from any bank anywhere. He wants to refi a portion of his condo, so it is totally secured, he has cash, credit, no debt and income with no bank wanting the business. Keep in mind I am not talking about a second lien where if he filed for bankruptcy the bank gets nothing, we are talking first lien here. So, how can this be if banks are ‘eager’ to lend, the credit markets are fully functional or the economy is just fine? It is not possible as this guy is prime to lend to. Now, if a bank is not going to lend to him, which is a collateralized loan I might add, then they are not going to lend to a small business or consumers in general.
All of this points to much tighter credit and much higher unemployment coming soon. Especially since banks are dumping TARP as fast as they can because they do not want to be told to lend by the administration or they want that one last big payday before the whole thing comes down. Actually, my belief is that why wouldn’t banks not want to repay TARP since they know they could get it back anytime they want. Either way, banks do not want to lend and they are not going. No lending, no growth.
There is good news and bad news to this mess. The good news is it is almost over and the bad news is that is it is almost over. No matter what side of the fence you are on the one thing I can assure you of is that it is going to pass tomorrow morning. Even though I can also assure you that it is a budget buster, see the Republican CBO inquiry today for proof, and you should all know by now that the CBO is garbage in, garbage out group. What I mean is that if you feed it the sequence of data you want results for you are certain to get the desired results you want.
The real unbiased results were from the actuary that submitted his results a couple weeks ago, sorry, but actuaries know insurance and are key to determining costs, risks and results. His report shows that the costs for premiums will go sky high, I guarantee that to be the case as well, I know a thing or two about insurance as well. Basically, we have lawyers writing a bill that is math intensive and that is a major mistake, for proof look at Medicare deficits, Social Security, National Flood Insurance or any other government run program. For those who think this bill will reduce health insurance premiums ask yourself this one question, how can it is they did not take out the federal anti-trust exemption for insurance companies?
Seriously, without taking out that one exemption it is next to impossible to lower insurance premiums because it restricts citizens from buying policies across state lines. That means that insurers who have a lock on some states will still have a lock on those states, give me a break. Not only that, but now these same insurers must add millions of sick people to the roles and cannot charge them higher premiums, specifically, so that means all of our premiums will go up. This bill is the greatest gift to the insurance industry ever created. The only government gift to the private industry that was better, and it was not even close, was the no bid contracts to Halliburton under Bush. If this thing passes, buy insurance companies because for the first time in history the Federal government will mandate that citizens will be forced to buy a product from private companies to the tune of a trillion dollars over the next 10 years, give or take a few billion.
Because premiums will go sky high and our brilliant elected officials are incapable of doing simple math the subsidized premiums we will have to pay will blow those sweet deficit reducing estimates right out of the water within 3 to 4 years. If the administration and Congress decided to work with the industry, people like me who are truly impartial, they could have built a real reform bill, but since they think they know everything they have just put the final nail in the coffin of the US, from a fiscal point of view. Medicare will be insolvent or eliminated much faster than currently projected and the budget deficits will be through the roof by 2016 as the new taxes make people rethink how much money they want to earn. Oh, I am also assuming that we are actually in a recovery I might add, but if we are not in a real recovery, which the housing numbers today shows that without government help we are still in trouble, then the trouble comes much earlier.
What is that you say, AARP and the AMA support this bill so it must be OK? Let me tell you something about those organizations, in my opinion, they would sell their grand kids for an extra dollar and I am not kidding. AARP had a Medicare Advantage plan that they endorsed pulled from the market because it was so bad. They endorsed the product, it got pulled from the market and I can assure you that Medicare Advantage contract was a lot shorter than 2,100 pages long so it is highly unlikely they even know what is in the health care reform bill, but they know they can profit from it somehow. They hate variable annuity contracts, but love immediate annuity contracts because they have a GA contract with NY Life. Basically, if they can profit from it they will endorse it, period.
The AMA, who knows what they see in it except that they probably think they will get a permanent Doc Fix Bill passed or they like the idea of mandatory private insurance much better than a public option. Let’s face it, $26 per office visit from Medicare must stink versus the $50 or $90 per visit from private insurance. If you combine that an additional 30M new patients, or 40M depending who you listen to or where you get your uninsured number from, that equals some major money for the AMA and its members.
Clearly, this whole bill revolves around money for everyone. Everyone who loves it is getting paid big time to endorse it or vote for it. However, you, the person who pays for everything, is not in favor of this bill according to every poll conducted. I wonder why you are not in favor of it? Maybe because you know your Congress person is receiving tons of money from special interest groups to push things through, check opensecrets.org to see, or that Bernie Sanders, a socialist, sold out for $10B, way to be a socialist, Ben Nelson sold out for less, and of course we have the Louisiana Purchase take II. However, you have to pay your taxes plus the health insurance premiums and Congress wonders why you don’t want this thing, incredible.
What I find interesting is that New York, who is on the verge of bankruptcy, should have held out against this thing. Where was Schumer and Gillibrand on this? Why didn’t they say no way on this bill and get out Medicaid paid for? It work for Ben Nelson and Bernie I am sure it would have worked for NY. Oh yeah, Chuck was busy making the media rounds and calling flight attendants “bitch” instead of doing is fiduciary responsibility to his home state. I dislike the Republicans, I mean abortion that is the best defense against this thing you can come up with, however I agree with them that this bill is the train wreck of the century. Why is China moving towards capitalism, but the US appears to be moving towards socialism?
Clearly socialism did not and does not work, but here we are. For those who want the socialist lifestyle I urge you to seek out the countries that live under those types of regimes. I admit the US has problems, nothing is perfect, but here is the thing most countries want what we have, not the other way around. We could fix health care the right way if we took our time and did things in the open, as Obama promised he would do, but that never happened. Instead we decided to use a sledge hammer to itch our nose and it is not going to end well. Unfortunately it will take 4 years for me to be proven correct.
I am on a quest for yield, nothing major, but anything better than treasuries without risking everything. Guess what, it does not exist without taking on monster risk. I know, this is not new news, but still it is a sign of what the Fed has resorted to in order to “get the credit markets working” again. Money markets are paying .1% and short-term treasuries are yielding 0% so what is a person seeking income supposed to do?
There is nothing one can do other than go seeking high risk yield, exactly what the Fed wants. All this has done is helped the credit markets function again, but it has also gotten individuals to do what they do not want to do again, take excessive risk. Now, I own PCY, sovereign emerging market debt, which is “risky” as owning any other foreign government debt, but not too risky and it pays a nice 6.24%. However, Dubai, Spain, Greece and some Eastern European governments have me really thinking that perhaps PCY should be paired back some, but where do I go?
You may also know that I am very short the market, surprising flat in those positions which may be shocking to most of you (I know that may also disappoint many of you as well), but I do know what I am doing. I know my shorts will pay off as short-term treasuries and the currency markets are telling everyone something is coming, it’s kind of like a freight train barreling down on all of us blowing its horn but you all look the other way, but I digress. In other words, I am extremely confident in my shorts right now and considering my relative flatness in my positions, it doesn’t really matter. So with my remaining money I would really like some high yield, lower risk holdings since I believe we have hit a multiyear high in the markets.
I also believe that the likelihood of a meaningful rate hike is not in the cards ever again and deflation is here for the foreseeable future. This was illustrated by Kroger’s earnings and, locally in my area, Penn Traffic’s, a grocer, bankruptcy (for like the third time), which shows the deflationary death spiral we are currently in. Long-term, inflation will come like we have never seen it and, ironically, we do see inflation in actual food prices, but grocers simply do not have pricing power, which is what deflation is. Therefore, fixed income in the near future is incredibly attractive, but where is the yield?
Sure, I can get into treasuries, but I think the supply we will see next year will trigger the beginning of a bear market for treasuries, which is why I want to sell my existing holdings at a profit. I could buy high yield, I like the HYG ETF for this option, but look at the holdings, Tenet, Ford, Calpine, Delta and a bunch of other questionable issues. The yield is attractive at 9.5%, but the risk? The other option would be investment grade corporate ETF’s, I really like LQD, but the yield is not that attractive at 4.68% 30 day SEC. I also am very bearish on financials which make up some 24% of the portfolio which scares me to death, considering we all really know financials are in much worse shape than we would like to admit publically.
This is not only an issue for me, but for millions of Americans seeking income from their investments. As illustrated by several stories, recently on CNBC.com as well “Tired of Money Markets? Investors Explore Debt Funds,” investors are plowing money into income funds and shunning equity funds, so much for a retail support bull market, because they are seeking yield. In the CNBC story it is trying to convince investors to put money into short-term bond funds for higher yields instead of money market accounts. Now, I cannot argue against that since I have done the same exact thing, but is that the right thing to do? You have to remember that if one takes the dividends from a bond fund in cash chances are that you will lose money, it is almost a 100% certainty that will be the case. People who buy money markets want stability with, really, no risk and that is not what you get with short-term bond funds. Sure, you get a higher yield, but with a higher yield you get more risk.
Even these higher yields the article brags about is pitiful, 1.5-2%, and I do not believe that is responsible reporting or advice to give to risk adverse investors. Take more risk for a paltry yield even though you really do not want to risk your principal, which is what you are doing with this fund. The irony is that the more people who do this strategy those funds will grow enormous, there are trillions in money market accounts, and then you are simply blowing a bubble in short-term bonds which will burst eventually. In other words, this will not end well for the risk adverse investor.
What I have decided to do, which is pure insanity and because I have no choice, thanks Ben, is to build my own strategic income fund. I am going to hold my PCY, add HYG and LQD as far as percentages are concerned I believe I will lean more towards the PCY and HYG right now. I decided to do that because of the massive liquidity in the market and decided that the default risk right now, keep in mind this might change next week, month or year, is pretty low and this will boost my yield significantly right now. I will only buy ETF’s and will not buy mutual funds because of the intraday liquidity that ETF’s offer and, in this case, you can see all of the holdings. Mutual funds are rather archaic relics from decades past that served their purpose and ETF’s, with all their flaws, are much better even though there are, gasp, transaction costs associated with them.
Whether or not this is the best portfolio that could be designed is questionable, but there is very little in the way of choice out there right now. I really like bonds at the moment as their real rate of return will more than likely be better than stocks in the near-term. Bonds did not price in a 5% GDP growth rate like stocks did which means there is much less downside risk at the moment. Deflation appears to be our problem which is favorable to fixed income at this stage of the game. Bonds and preferred stocks put you first and second in line if the firm goes bankrupt, common share are worthless 99% of the time and, frankly, as an investor you need to start thinking about issues like that in the future because corporate bankruptcies will increase in the near future.
Of course, even if you’re a bond holder if the government steps in you could be wiped out still, but the odds are still in your favor. Regardless, I need an income portfolio and this design gives me high income, with some upside potential, I know what I own, and I have intraday liquidity that is tough to beat. The best part is anyone could own this because they are ETF’s with no minimums to get in. Of course, always do your own due diligence and what is right for me probably is not right for you.
Subscribe to Annuity IQ's Feed
