I Don’t Know Why The Caged Bird Sings

Posted on May 14, 2017August 24, 2018 by steve

I begin by taking care of an essential item of business: Happy Mother’s Day, everyone. Today is my first motherless Mother’s Day, which is sad, but, on a happier note, my daughter (a mother of nearly two year’s standing herself) is due any day. So there’s that.

In addition, it’s true: I don’t know why the caged bird sings. I have never read Maya Angelou’s magnum opus, and I don’t expect I ever will. What’s more (though I’m not particularly proud of this), in terms of the motivations for the warbling of the captive orinth, I have never particularly cared to find out.

That is, perhaps, until now. And here, of course, though reluctantly, painfully, I refer to the recent doings in the White House. Indisputably, the Presidential Manse is something of a cage, and its current occupant is certainly capable of both flying and singing, or, more pertinent for our purposes, tweeting, which is, after all, the type of singing in which your typical winged tree denizen engages.

I wish he’d just shut his big fat beak. His electronic croonings, long since tiresome, have now become dangerous. Case and Point: this Comey thing (sorry). When I’d heard that he canned that dissembling, misanthropic domestic law enforcement czar, I was pleased. The guy should’ve been shown the door a long time ago. Upon further immediate reflection, I decided it was a sublime political move. I mean, his recently vanquished political opponent had just emerged, in rather unseemly fashion, to inform a sequence of enraptured audiences that, but for Comey, those new curtains she picked out would be dangling from the broad windows of 1600 PA Avenue as she spoke. Of course, the other half of her rationalizations dealt with some nefarious, improbable linkage between the WikiLeaks DNC leakage, the Russians, and the Trump Campaign. I’ll go on record as opining that this is hogwash, well, part of it any way. Did the Russians hack the DNC? Probably. But so did everyone else. Were they seeking to influence our elections? Of course they were. But boys and girls, it’s time to grow up. Major nations have been messing with each other’s elections since mankind was still sporting tails, and I suspect that the most enthusiastic and effective perpetrator, for most of the last couple of centuries, is the good old U S of A.

But were the Trumpsters actively working with the Ruskies on this one? I highly doubt it. What was the nature of the alleged collusion? No one has said. And what form could it have assumed? Did Team Trump pay Putin to do this? Please. First off, Putin is, almost inarguably, through purloined riches, the wealthiest man on the planet, and the DNC Server was such a sitting duck that it couldn’t have cost very much. Did the Russians feed the data to the Campaign, for them to leak? It would seem unlikely, and one way or another, the information would’ve gotten out.

Also, it may be worth remembering that as late as dusk on November 8, 2016, the probability of a Trump victory was placed, at best, in the low double digits. The HRC triumph bash, replete with shattered glass and riverside fireworks, was all teed up. And how long do you think, after, she took her hand off the bible on January 20^th, would she have instructed the Bureau to put cement shoes on her hated opponent? Not very long, I imagine. Trump’s people weren’t stupid (they won an unwinnable election after all), and I doubt they were taking any undue risks of this nature with the perfidious Russians. Plus, there was a great deal of roadkill on the President’s journey to the White House. By my count, he deep sixed at least a dozen campaign managers alone. Are there no disgruntled former insiders ready to sing a Russian ballad as a means of score evening? If so, they have yet to emerge.

But the Russian interference story lingers, used by Progressives like the drunk uses the proverbial lamp post: more for support than illumination. And, with the Dems complaining that the FBI Director who was incentivized to push this narrative was to blame for their loss, how beautiful was it to have sacked him? Had it been handled correctly, it would’ve left the, er, left, with little fodder to use against their political foes (lest they demonstrate, yet again, their seemingly insatiable acumen for hypocrisy), and, as such, might’ve disappeared from our capacity-addled attentions quicker than a Snapchat photo (or, for that matter, the valuation of the device’s corporate owner).

But then came the tweets, including perhaps the most idiotic one in an ocean of moronic 140-character brain fluffs: the one warning Comey about the potential presence of taped conversations. Now, I hate to agree with the millions that are seeking to undermine the current government at every turn, but this stunt was completely out of bounds. Just as (as pointed out by Deputy AG Rosenstein) FBI Directors do not comment on the decision factors on a case they’ve tried to drop, presidents don’t issue veiled threats at deposed FBI Directors. And now, I think everyone’s got some reason to worry. There is literally no telling what may next be issuing forth from the Presidential keyboard, and, if it gets much worse, Trump’s enemies may actually have a legal case against him.

But what offends me most is that this sequence more or less destroyed last week’s confident call for a breakout of the U.S. equity complex. These ornithological discharges made me look like a simian, and I’m not one to sit idly by in consequence. Yes, there were other contributing factors. The late reporting Consumer Discretionary Sector dropped some pretty nasty waste — at a point contemporaneous to a rather tepid Retail Sales print. There was some sort of global cyber-attack that hit about 900 countries on Friday, crippling enterprises ranging from Fed-Ex to the British National Health System. The Energy Complex is bouncing around like a billiard ball. L’il Kim lobbed another one into regional waters this weekend.

Still and all, Q1 manifested a 13.5% increase in earnings and a 6.5% jump in sales. According to the published genius of the investment class, affairs are even rosier in portions of the investment universe ranging from Europe to the Emerging Markets. Rates are low and showing no signs of busting out. Most economic models are projecting back-loaded acceleration in economic statistics. I’ve seen worse backdrops for loading up on stocks – Washingtonian nonsense notwithstanding.

But a couple of points bear mention here. First, I’m really skeptical about all this Europe love. I’ve seen the analyses that suggest the Continent is cheap relative to our own valuations, but I advise those who care to proceed to do so at their own caution. It strikes me that Europe remains the same geriatric, declining economic beast with which we’ve been contending for most of our adult lives, with high unemployment, widespread credit issues, an unworkable fiscal matrix and a measurable disposition towards redistributive socialism. Some of you pros may be well positioned to take advantage of transient upswings, but as for me, I think I’d rather keep my risk capital moored on these here shores.

On the other hand, I don’t, as a matter of policy, invest in the markets.

But even domestically, I’d be careful about where I place my bets. That a perversely disproportionate segment of gains derive from a small handful of names is a widely analyzed phenomenon that need not be rehashed in this space. For the mere mortal tickers in the stock trading universe, it’s really all about earnings, and, creeping into the dynamic, is the age-old problem of disappointers being punished more severely than delighters have been rewarded:

But with quarterly earnings substantially behind us, this is something that we arguably can ignore for a few weeks. In the meantime, it may be worth remembering that tomorrow marks the 45-day window for hedge fund redemptions, and this may perhaps cause some gratuitously violent price action, as catalyzed by an 11^th hour wave of unexpected redemptions.

The latter would be particularly true if the Washington bird flu, rather than subsiding, spreads to epidemic proportions: a scenario that one can now neither rule out nor discount. As I have reviewed this wearying sequence of events, I cannot help but fear that Trump may have made the same type of early-term mistake as his two predecessors: taking a constructive action too precipitously, and with inadequate understanding of deferred consequences. W. Bush invaded Iraq at a point of maximum post-9/11 goodwill, and we’re still stuck there. Few rational folks would argue that deposing Saddam Hussein was an unholy objective. But at the time we had more pressing geopolitical problems with which to contend, he failed to form the type of broad coalition that worked well for his father in Gulf War 1, and the W presidency arguably declined in a more or less linear fashion from there.

Then there’s Obama, who rammed through a massive, poorly framed and ineptly executed re-engineering of the Health Care system at a moment when our post-crash capital economy itself was just emerging from the critical care unit. Unemployment at the time was peaking at 7.5%, and of course, he passed the bill through a reconciliation process that removed all transparency from the drafting of the final provisions (recall the Pelosi line). At that point, the Health Care system was broken and needed fixing, but the timing was terrible, and, like the Iraq War fiasco, the coalition behind the reform was self-servingly narrow. Of course, the economy slowly regained its footing in subsequent years, but ultimately, the framework at least partially imploded, and, as I’ve stated previously, I believe that the sticker shock of 2017 premium increases (disclosed in October of 2016) was, more than WikiLeaks, more than Comey, what turned the last election’s tide against his preferred successor.

As for Trump, though it’s impossible to know at the moment, it may be that he has fallen into the same trap. Comey is indeed a showboat, more interested in his own agenda/standing than in doing his job appropriately. He was not capable of running the FBI effectively and needed to be fired. Had Hillary won, I suspect she would have taken this step herself. But the timing may have been too precipitous. Like his predecessors, he might’ve been better served by waiting, maybe getting the Republican Congressional Caucus together to pass some legislation, before putting two to the head of his target. And the execution was terribly, well, executed. Why not follow the Clintonian Friday afternoon news dump and then announce something constructive to change the subject?

But no, he did this on a Tuesday and then made matters worse with his messaging. As a result, not only may he have bought himself a whole passel of problems, but also, as everyone has stated, he has rendered the path to delivering on key parts of his agenda much more problematic.

But the world is full of such improbable contradictions. Take Maya Angelou for example. She wrote (I’m told) profoundly of racism, sexual abuse and other horrors of growing up as a black female in the postbellum South. Yet she freely admitted to operating as a madam in her young adult years. Then, she settled down to accept an endowed professorship at Wake Forest University, which, though a fine academic institution, was founded and resides on a tobacco plantation that relied for centuries on slave labor.

So I’m gonna stop wondering why the caged bird sings, and can only, for the moment, pray for the sound of crickets emanating from such locales as the White House, Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago.

TIMSHEL

Success Story

Posted on April 30, 2017August 24, 2018 by steve

“We got the greatest country in the world here. The highest standard of living. The grossest national product.”
— Archie Bunker

For want of superior alternatives, I’m dedicating this edition to Archie Bunker, erstwhile “everyman” hero of the seminal 1970s CBS series “All in the Family”. Many of you may be too young to remember Archie, a hard-working, family loving, WWII vet, spewing out politically incorrect bon mots from his Queens enclave, but much is to be learned from him, that is, if one takes the trouble to pay attention. Improbably (at least to me), I’m now older than he was purported to have been during the run of the series, and, while I always liked him, I believe, with the passage of time, I have come to understand him better. He is a product of his environment and times, working hard, fighting for his country, supporting his family, and, in his off hours, coming home to arguments with his left wing graduate student son-in-law (whom he is supporting) who seeks to tame his ignorance even as he eats his food. He tries is best to cope with the world, rapidly changing before his eyes, but often, it becomes too many for him.

As time goes by, I increasingly know how he feels.

I felt particularly sorry for him when his best buddy, Stretch Cunningham, his doltish, wisecracking comrade on the loading dock, drops dead of a heart attack. Archie is asked by the family to speak at the funeral, and in the process, finds out that, unbeknownst to him and all his peers, Stretch was actually Jewish. This being a problem at the time for a middle aged, working class, high school grad, he struggles to understand, particularly given his fallen buddy’s decidedly Anglican surname. His family offers up the possibility that perhaps he changed his name, but Archie rejects this out of hand, for perhaps the best reason imaginable. If Stretch had indeed changed his name but retained his Jewish identity, one thing was certain:

“There ain’t supposed to be no ham in there”.

Apart from his devotion to his wife, daughter and (eventually) grandson, Archie is above all, a patriot. And, responding to one of his meathead son-in-law’s endless stream of criticism of the country that spawned him, reared him, and provided him all is comforts, he did indeed point out, in a first season episode called “Success Story”, that we have the greatest country in the world, the highest standard of living and “the grossest national product”.

A reading of Friday’s action would seem to corroborate, yet again, Archie’s clairvoyance. Though pointy-headed economists (a tribe to which I belong), for reasons that I have long ago forgotten, decided a couple of decades ago to switch the benchmark metric for nationwide output from Gross National Product to Gross Domestic Product, the introductory first quarter estimates can aptly be described as gross.

The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model, often referenced in this space, saw it coming, and, as the hours trickled down to the Friday/8:30 print, private economists started to catch on, with the final consensus coming in at 1.0%. But we missed even this diluted number by a full thirty percent, as, as everyone knows, the actual figure clocked in at 0.7%, annualized: the worst such showing in three years:

The results failed to jolt market participants over-much, and the rationalizations (crazy weather, seasonality, etc.) had been working their way into valuation for weeks. But the consumer spending print of 0.3% (vs. consensus estimate of 0.7%) is somewhat worrying, as is the unmistakable gravitational pull evidenced in the graph supplied immediately above.

Be that as it may, we all knew that the totality of the data coming our way was ambiguous, as evidenced in part by some boffo earnings results released in advance of the Archie Bunker GDP print. Names like Alphabet (OK; Google), Amazon, and sentimental favorite CAT were all astonishingly good. And, while there were some embarrassing misses (Airline Companies, Auto Companies, Starbucks), on balance, with nearly 60% of income precincts reporting, the overall tally is anticipated to come in at a 12 ½ % year-over-year gain – the best showing since the wretched year of 2011.

Moreover, the earnings picture has gained encouraging momentum in recent days:

Perhaps the other most salient dynamic is that Team Trump (never a group to let recent failures and/or humiliations slow them down in their headline grabbing frenzy) released its tax plan last week, a document which fell considerably short, in terms of volume, of the Manhattan telephone book benchmark for quantity of content. In fact, it is precisely one-page long. Scanning its voluminous details, I find it to be a bullish blueprint, and one that investors should embrace. But there’s a lot of caveats here, kids. First, as of right now, there’s no indication that anything of this nature can pass through Congress, and tax reform, an exercise not even attempted in 30 years, is a particularly sticky wicket. It may in fact be even stickier now, especially insofar as the Democrats seem determined to cast not a single vote (other than irrelevant salves to politically threatened seat holders of their own party) in favor of any bill produced by their opposite numbers, and that there is a core group of Republicans who are unlikely to support any tax plan that doesn’t provide offsetting revenues to match any relief provided therein. On offsetting revenues, the, er, tome is silent.

If, however, something of this nature goes through (and it says here that, best case, we’re looking at the end of the ’17 Congressional Calendar or beyond), there will be winners and losers. Perhaps in a dose of poetic justice, the plan calls for the elimination of the deduction of state and local taxes (a dubious and unfair proposition from the get-go) from the Washington-bound levies, thereby forcing us coastal denizens to pay the full freight already imposed upon residents of zero state tax jurisdictions such as Texas and Nevada. In addition, the banks will take a short-term hit – particularly (and you can’t make this stuff up) given the fact that significant portions of the left side of their balance sheets take the form of deferred tax credits, the value of which will be diluted by any reduction in the base rate itself.

I reckon they’ll survive this blow.

And, on the whole, I can’t say there’s an awful lot of which to complain, as the first trimester of ’17 melts into the second. There appears to be earnings momentum, and the dubious consensus may be right this time that: a) Q1 GDP is ripe for an upward revision; and b) the force of this metric may very well gain traction as the year unfolds. In the meantime, mixed macro numbers are likely to keep a lid on domestic rates, and, oh by the way, mid-week, ECB Chair (Super) Mario Draghi took to the podium to announce that he’s in no particular hurry to stop, or even downshift, the Brussels money printing machine.

Perhaps this is why the SPX, though nominally and patriotically selling off on Friday, is 13 puny index points from breaking out of this increasingly tiresome 23 handle, and 10 punier points from all-time highs. It also bears mention that the NASDAQ Composite, with minimal fanfare, crashed through the heretofore un-breached 6,000 threshold, and held this territory even through Friday’s Gross Domestic Product print.

So, on the whole, I am getting a bit more constructive. Next week features a continued onslaught of earnings releases, and, in macro-land, Friday’s potentially important April Jobs number. But this sets up to me as a bad and good news is good news paradigm, with a strong number corroborating happier days, and a weak one likely to be interpreted as being accretive to bonds and catalyzing to constructive fiscal (e.g. tax reform) and monetary policy.

But, global citizens that we are, it bears remembering that the week begins slowly, given Monday’s traditional celebration of International Workers Day. So I’ll conclude by giving a shout out to all of those wielders of shovels and welding equipment. It’s your day, and, as always, you’ve earned it. We don’t pay too much attention here in the States, but what do we know?

And as for Archie, he went from union man to entrepreneur, eventually taking ownership of his favorite local watering hole. Some of his simpatico was perhaps sacrificed in the transition, but at the end of the day, he was indeed a Success Story, and, were he with us today, I doubt he’d be taking May Day off. More likely than not, he’d be pouring drinks and ringing the cash register like always. As Archie knew in his bones, the path to Success, for all of us, makes very little allowance for virtues that run in conflict with diligence and perseverance.

TIMSHEL.