Kto kupuje obligacje USA?

[przycinek.usa]

Ponizej bardzo ciekawy tekst ze Sprott Asset Management LP. Dla niecierpliwych
od razu podpowiadam, ze chodzi o podejrzenie, ze za kupnem 500 miliardow
dolarow obligacji rzadowych kryje sie tajemnicza i niezidentyfikowana grupa
"inwestorow". Odpowiedz kim sa oczywiscie nie pada, ale opisany jest mechanizm
raportowania tych kwot. Caly tekst sugeruje, ze te obligacje sa kupowane przez
podstawione podmioty za pieniadze FED.

www.zerohedge.com/article/sprott-calls-fed-ponzi-scheme-half-trillion-treasury-purchasers-are-unaccounted
Ja tylko od siebie dodam, ze to ma sens. Juz od dawna zadaje sobie bowiem
pytanie kto i po co kupuje te obligacje. Jezeli zalozymy roboczo to - o czym
plotkuje sie juz od dawna, czyli, ze rzad monetyzuje duzo wieksza ilosc
deficytu jak sie przyznaje oficjalnie - to pojawia sie pytanie o stabilnosc
systemu finansow na calym swiecie.

Wtedy, przy takim zalozeniu, kwestie kursu dolara sa niejako rozwiazane. Nic
dziwnego, ze Bernankie tak sie boi audytu, bo jesli to jest prawda, to
pierwsza reakcja rynku na taki stan rzeczy to silna przecena USD.

Ale pozostaje zadac sobie pytanie - czy jest mozliwe, ze to jest nieprawda?
Trudno mi to jednoznacznie ocenic. Jest mozliwe, ze artykul popelnia blad
merytoryczny sugerujac te 500 miliardow pochodzi z pozabilansowego druku. Dla
mnie najprostszym wyjasnieniem bylby alphabet soup i wykup obligacji FRE i FNM
z rynku. To jednak nie tlumaczy skad sie wziely te zakupy w kategorii
Household (patrz artykul)

Zeby to jakos skonkludowac - to powiem tak - jezeli FED robi pozabilansowe
machloje i sprawa wyjdzie - to dolar spadnie. Jesli jednak to nie
pozabilansowe machloje, tylko normalna dzialalnosc FED, ktory powiekszyl
bilans, nakupil smieci od bankow a te w jakis tajemniczy sposob zakupily
obligacje poprzez podmioty zaklasyfikowane w Household Sector - to wtedy czeka
nas wtorny skurcz na rynku, bo te dzialania FED sie zakonczyly; banki maja
rozdete rezerwy a rynek dlugu rozrosl sie juz do absurdu. Wtedy dolar moze sie
bardzo gwaltownie umocnic.

FED i Geithner licza na to, ze uda im sie prowadzic polityke monetarna
balansujac na krawedzi zalamania stop i rynku dlugu poprzez kontrolowana
emisje pieniadza. A to nie jest mozliwe, poniewaz skala tej operacji jest
niewiarygodna. Wielkosc rynku dlugu jest zbyt powazna, aby mozna bylo
bezpiecznie kontrolowac kursy obligacji na obecnych poziomach przez dluzszy
czas. Czyli innymi slowy da sie kontrolowac, ale krotko. Na dluzsza mete sie
nie da. Rynek natomiast wierzy w to, ze sie da na podstawie Japonii, ktora
robila to przez dekade. Ale USA nie ma substytutu rynku zbytu w postaci
nadwyzki eksportu. Japonia mogla taka fikcje trzymac przez dluzszy czas, bo
byl eksport. USA natomiast jedzie na deficycie.

[kadi-lak]

Niestety, "nie otwiera sie". ALbo nie mam czegos w kompie
niezbednego do otwarcia tej strony albo link sie popsul....widze
tylko ze tekst zamiescil moj ulubiony Tylor Durden z
niedoscignionego Fightclub

Part 1

[polarbeer]

Is it all just a Ponzi scheme?
By: Eric Sprott & David Franklin

In our May/June Markets at a Glance, "The Solution…is the Problem", we discussed how
much debt the US government would need to issue in order to balance the budget for
fiscal 2009. We calculated they would need to sell $2.041 trillion in new debt -
or almost
three times the new debt that was issued in fiscal 2008. As a thought experiment, we
separated all the various US Treasury owners and asked our readers whether each
group
could afford to increase their 2009 treasury purchases by 200%. In the end, we
surmised
that most groups couldn’t, and prepared our readers for the worst.

Almost seven months later, however, nothing particularly bad has happened on the US
debt front. There have been no failed auctions, no sovereign defaults, no
downgrades of
debt and no significant increase in rates…not so much as a hiccup in the
treasury market.
Knowing what we discussed this past June, we have to ask how it all went so
smoothly.
After all – it was pretty obvious there wasn’t enough buying power to satisfy
the auctions
under ‘normal’ circumstances.

In the latest Treasury Bulletin published in December 2009, ownership data
reveals that
the United States increased the public debt by $1.885 trillion dollars in fiscal
2009.1 So
who bought all the new Treasury securities to finance the massive increase in
expenditures? According to the same report, there were three distinct groups
that bought
more than they did in 2008. The first was "Foreign and International Buyers", who
purchased $697.5 billion worth of Treasury securities in fiscal 2009 –
representing about
23% more than their respective purchases in fiscal 2008. The second group was the
Federal Reserve itself. According to its published balance sheet, it increased
its treasury
holdings by $286 billion in 2009, representing a 60% increase year-over-year.2 This
increase appears to be a direct result of the Federal Reserve’s Quantitative Easing
program announced this past March. Most of the other identified buyers in the
Treasury
Bulletin were either net sellers or small buyers in 2009. While the Q4 data is
not yet
available, the Q1, Q2 and Q3 data suggests that the State and Local governments and
US Savings Bonds groups will be net sellers of US Treasury securities in 2009, while
pension funds, insurance companies and depository institutions only increased their
purchases by a negligible amount.

So who was the third large buyer? Drum roll please,... it was "Other Investors".
After
purchasing $90 billion in 2008, this group has purchased $510.1 billion of
freshly minted
treasury securities so far in the first three quarters of fiscal 2009. If you
annualize this rate
of purchase, they are on pace to buy $680 billion of US treasuries this year -
or more than
seven times what they purchased in 2008. This is undoubtedly the group that made the
US deficit possible this year. But who are they? The Treasury Bulletin
identifies "Other
Investors" as consisting of Individuals, Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSE),
Brokers and Dealers, Bank Personal Trusts and Estates, Corporate and Non-Corporate
Businesses, Individuals and Other Investors. Hmmm. Do you think anyone in that group
had almost $700 billion to invest in the US Treasury market in fiscal 2009? We
didn’t
either. To dig further, we turned to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors Flow of
Funds Data which provides a detailed breakdown of the owners of Treasury
Securities to
Q3 2009.3 Within this grouping, the GSE’s were small buyers of a mere $5 billion
this
year;4 Broker and Dealers were sellers of almost $80 billion;5 Commercial
Banking were
buyers of approximately $80 billion;6 Corporate and Non-corporate Businesses,
grouped
together, were buyers of $11.6 billion, for a grand net purchase of $16.6
billion.7 So who
really picked up the tab? To our surprise, the only group to actually
substantially increase
their purchases in 2009 is defined in the Federal Reserve Flow of Funds Report
as the
"Household Sector". This category of buyers bought $15 billion worth of
treasuries in
2008, but by Q3 2009 had purchased a whopping $528.7 billion worth. At the end of Q3
this Household Sector category now owns more treasuries than the Federal Reserve
itself.8

So to summarize, the majority buyers of Treasury securities in 2009 were:

1. Foreign and International buyers who purchased $697.5 billion.

2. The Federal Reserve who bought $286 billion.

3. The Household Sector who bought $528 billion to Q3 – which puts them on
track purchase $704 billion for fiscal 2009.

These three buying groups represent the lion’s share of the $1.885 trillion of
debt that was
issued by the US in fiscal 2009.

We must admit that we were surprised to discover that "Households" had bought so
many
Treasuries in 2009. They bought 35 times more government debt than they did in 2008.
Given the financial condition of the average household in 2009, this makes
little sense to
us. With unemployment and foreclosures skyrocketing, who could afford to increase
treasury investments to such a large degree? For our more discerning readers, this
enormous "Household" investment was made outside of Money Market Funds, Mutual
Funds, ETF’s, Life Insurance Companies, Pension and Retirement funds and Closed-End
Funds, which are all separate reporting categories.9 This leaves a very
important question
- who makes up this Household Sector?

Amazingly, we discovered that the Household Sector is actually just a catch-all
category.
It represents the buyers left over who can’t be slotted into the other group
headings. For
most categories of financial assets and liabilities, the values for the
Household Sector are
calculated as residuals. That is, amounts held or owed by the other sectors are
subtracted
from known totals, and the remainders are assumed to be the amounts held or owed by
the Household Sector. To quote directly from the Flow of Funds Guide, "For
example, the
amounts of Treasury securities held by all other sectors, obtained from asset data
reported by the companies or institutions themselves, are subtracted from total
Treasury
securities outstanding, obtained from the Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and
Outlays of the United States Government and the balance is assigned to the household
sector." (Emphasis ours)10 So to answer the question - who is the Household Sector?
They are a PHANTOM. They don’t exist. They merely serve to balance the ledger in the
Federal Reserve’s Flow of Funds report.
Our concern now is that this is all starting to resemble one giant Ponzi scheme.
We all
know that the Fed has been active in the market for T-bills. As you can see from
Table A,
under the auspices of Quantitative Easing, they bought almost 50% of the new
Treasury
issues in Q2 and almost 30% in Q3. It serves to remember that the whole point of
selling
new US Treasury bonds is to attract outside capital to finance deficits or to
pay off existing
debts that are maturing. We are now in a situation, however, where the Fed is
printing
dollars to buy Treasuries as a means of faking the Treasury’s ability to attract
outside
capital. If our research proves anything, it’s that the regular buyers of US
debt are no
longer buying, and it amazes us that the US can successfully issue a record number
Treasuries in this environment without the slightest hiccup in the market.

[polarbeer]

Perhaps the most striking example of the new demand dynamics for US Treasuries comes from Bill Gross, who is co-chief investment officer at PIMCO and arguably one of the world’s most powerful bond investors. Mr. Gross recently revealed that his bond fund has cut holdings of US government debt and boosted cash to the highest levels since 2008.11 Earlier this year he referred to the US as a "ponzi style economy" and recomended that investors front run Uncle Sam and other world governments into government debt instruments of all forms.12 The fact that he is now selling US treasuries is a foreboding sign.

Foreign holders are also expressing concern over new Treasury purchases. In a recent discussion on the global role of the US dollar, Zhu Min, deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China, told an academic audience that "The world does not have so much money to buy more US Treasuries." He went on to say, "The United States cannot force foreign
governments to increase their holdings of Treasuries… Double the holdings? It is definitely impossible."13 Judging from these statements, it seems clear that the US cannot expect foreigners to continue to support their debt growth in this new economic environment. As US consumers buy fewer foreign goods, there are less US dollars available for foreigners to purchase future Treasury securities. Foreigners are the largest source of external capital that can be clearly identified in US Treasury data. If their support wanes in 2010, the US will require significant domestic support to fund future debt issuances. Mr. Gross’s recent comments suggest that their domestic support may already
be weakening.

As we have seen so illustriously over the past year, all Ponzi schemes eventually fail under their own weight. The US debt scheme is no different. 2009 has been witness to spectacular government intervention in almost all levels of the economy. This support requires outside capital to facilitate, and relies heavily on the US government’s ability to raise money in the debt market. The fact that the Federal Reserve and US Treasury cannot identify the second largest buyer of treasury securities this year proves that the traditional buyers are not keeping pace with the US government’s deficit spending. It makes us wonder if it’s all just a Ponzi scheme.

[przycinek.usa]

wymaga zainstalowania FLASHa, ale warto sie pofatygowac.

link do pdf

[przycinek.usa]

www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/Sprott%20December.pdf

Dokladnie tak jak zakladalem

[polarbeer]

Najbardziej niesamowita czescia tego raportu jest to ze tak latwo daje sie dotrzec do prawdy. Mozna by pomyslec ze umieja klamac lepiej po 100 latach doswiadczenia...

Pamietam jak smiesznym "wydarzeniem" byla pompa o zakonczeniu "quantitative easing", ktorym tak sie tutaj niektorzy podniecali... Przeciez to absolutnie jasne ze matematyka (proste + -) sie nie zgadza

najbardziej prawdopodobny scenariusz

[przycinek.usa]

Polarny, nie zgadzam sie. To nie jest jasne do konca. Nalezy sie spodziewac
wzrostu stop procentowych. To nie jest naiwnosc.

Po pierwsze - Co z tego, ze FED daje forse za darmo - skoro nikt nikomu dalej
tej forsy nie daje. PO drugie - Rynek obligacji istnieje dzieki zagranicy. Nie
ma gwarancji, ze wszyscy sie nagle nie zbiora i nie wywala tych obligacji. Wtedy
FED bedzie mial powazny problem - poniewaz wyplacenie im wszystkim dolarow
zdestabilizuje kurs dolara. A jak nie wyplaca - to stopy procentowe wzrosna.
Najprawdopodobniej zajdzie cos pomiedzy, FED kupi troche, a rynek troche
spadnie. I tego wlasnie sie spodziwam. Malego spadku. TNX na 7% TYX na 9%. To
dokumentnie zalatwi rynek nieruchomosci i bedzie mozna tanio kupic domu i hale
jak leci za gotowkie.

Kolejna sprawa - to powtorze z pierwszego postu. Nie ma pewnosci co to sa za
inwestorzy za te 500 miliardow. Nie bylbym taki pewny, ze to kant. Banki pozbyly
sie olbrzymiej ilosci smieci i sprzedly FEDowi wielka ilosc bezwartosciowego
papieru. Te inwestycje mogly isc naokolo, poprzez jakies nieujawnione podmioty.
To, ze nie mamy na ten temat wiedzy, nie oznacza automatycznie, ze jest to jakis
tajemniczy przekret.

Bedzie to latwo zweryfikowac. Ten proces raczej sie zakonczy, poniewaz FED
skupil juz wiekszosc zlych mortgage z rynku, wiec jesli ten Household Sector
nadal bedzie kupowac po 500 miliardow rocznie - to bedzie faktycznie znaczylo,
ze jakis kant jest na pewno. Jesli jednak tego wzrostu nie bedzie - to rynek
obligacji sie zalamie i sprawa bedzie jasna.

moim zdaniem stopy wzrosna

[przycinek.usa]

Po przemysleniu sobie sklaniam sie jednak do tezy, ze te 500B to pieniadze za
sprzedane MBSy. Tak sadze. Aby to dokladnie sprawdzic, nalezaloby sie zapoznac z
definicja tego Household sektor, co sie do tego zalicza, sprawdzic tabele z Flow
of Funds. Po prostu zmarnowac pol dnia. Niezaleznie od wyniku tego sprawdzania -
jest jasne, ze pieniadze tak czy inaczej pochodza z FED.

[polarbeer]

Moze powinienes przeczytac ten artykul jeszcze raz... tam wyraznie pisze ze "Houshold" to kategoria poza wszystkim co co jest ujawnione we bardziej specyficznych rubrykach.

1) "Co z tego, ze FED daje forse za darmo - skoro nikt nikomu dalej tej forsy nie daje."

[przycinek.usa]

W artykule nie podano dokladnie co jest w tym household. Ja kiedys na ten temat
czytalem, to nie calkiem tak, jak oni napisali. Ale nie chce mi sie w tym
grzebac aby to udowadniac. Podejrzewam, ze to jest calkiem trywialne - ktos kto
jest uwzgledniony w tej rubryce household - sprzedal MBSy FEDowi i za te
pieniadze kupil UST.
Inaczej musialby nastapic nielegalny transfer gotowki do tego kogos.
Artykul tego zreszta nie sugeruje. Oni nie pisza o nielegalnych przeplywac gotowki.

Tak czy inaczej jest prawda, ze to sa pieniadze wyczarowane - ale nie
przypinalbym do tego tej calej mistycznej otoczki i teorii spisku. Dla mnie jest
to wrecz dowod na to, ze rynek obligacji nie jest w stanie sam z siebie sie
dzwigac. To zas oznacza, ze piramida dlugu jest na kroplowce, czyli jest realne
niebezpieczenstwo wzrostu stop rynkowych, czyli inwestycje w zloto i commodities
sa ryzykowne..

Co do darmowej forsy - to nie chodzilo mi o kupno obligacji przez FED, tylko
stope procentowa pozyczki i stope w rezerwie czastkowej. Co do karaibskich
centrow finansowych, to tam nie ma takiego wielkiego przyrostu nominalnego. Nie
przejmowalbym sie.

[sevenseas]

wallstreetpit.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/image0162.png

To nie jest nic nowego ze household sector trzyma te obligi.

wallstreetpit.com/5025-what-if-the-household-sector-financed-
the-budget-deficit-by-taking-down-the-issuance

Ktos juz o tym pisal w czerwcu

DOKŁADNIE!!

[stoje_i_patrze]

BRAVO:

"Bedzie to latwo zweryfikowac. Ten proces raczej sie zakonczy, poniewaz FED
skupil juz wiekszosc zlych mortgage z rynku, wiec jesli ten Household Sector
nadal bedzie kupowac po 500 miliardow rocznie - to bedzie faktycznie znaczylo,ze
jakis kant jest na pewno. Jesli jednak tego wzrostu nie bedzie - to
rynekobligacji sie zalamie i sprawa bedzie jasna. "

program kończy się z końcem marca 2010.....

Rynek obligacji sie nie zalamie.

[polarbeer]

To moja przepowiednia na 2010: Stopy nadal beda nisko. "Kupcow" nie zabraknie,
nawet jezeli to nie "Households" ale jakas inna rubryczka pojawi z 3500%
wzrostem "zakupow" obligacji w ciagu roku. Najprawdopodobniej jednak bedzie to
cos nowego...

Proponuje konkurs na ladna nazwe dla nowych "inwestorow" w raportach FEDu. Co
sadzicie o Global Warming Funds albo International Bank for Carbon Settlements?

__________________

...Moze jednak to nie naiwnosc, ale autentyczna potrzeba ludzi kontynuowania
iluzji utrzymuje ten "system" przy zyciu...