How
To Speculate Your Way to Success: Doug Casey
by
Doug
Casey
Interviewed by JT Long of The
Gold Report
Recently
by Doug Casey:
Sociopathy Is Running the US
So far, 2012
has been a banner year for the stock market, which recently closed
the books on its best first quarter in 14 years. But Casey Research
Chairman Doug Casey insists that time is running out on the ticking
time bombs. Next week when Casey
Research's spring summit gets underway, Casey will open the
first general session addressing the question of whether the inevitable
is now imminent. In another exclusive interview with The Gold
Report, Casey tells us that he foresees extreme volatility
"as the titanic forces of inflation and deflation fight with each
other" and a forced shift to speculation to either protect or build
wealth.
The
Gold Report: You told us about two ticking time bombs
last September, Doug the trillions of dollars owned outside
the U.S. that could be dumped if the holders lose confidence, and
the trillions of dollars in the U.S. created to paper over the 2008
liquidity crisis. It's been six months since then. Have we averted
the disaster or are we closer than ever?
Doug
Casey: Things are worse now. The way I see it, what's going
to happen is inevitable; it's just a question of when. We're rapidly
approaching that moment. I suspect it will start in Europe, because
so many European governments are bankrupt; Greece isn't an exception,
it's the norm. So we have bankrupt governments trying to bail out
the European banks, which are bankrupt because they've loaned money
to the bankrupt governments. It's actually rather funny, in a perverse
way.
If it were
just the banks and the governments, I wouldn't care; they're just
getting what they deserve. The problem is that many prudent middle
class people are going to be wiped out. These folks have tried to
produce more than they consume for their whole lives and save the
difference. But their savings are almost all in government currencies,
and those currencies are held in banks. However, the banks are unable
to give back all the euros that these people have entrusted to them.
It's a very serious thing. So European governments are trying to
solve this by creating more euros. Eventually the euro is going
to reach its intrinsic value which is nothing. It's the same
in the U.S. The banks are bankrupt, the government's bankrupt and
creating more dollars so the banks don't go bust and depositors
don't lose their money.
I'm of the
opinion that if it doesn't blow up this year, the situation is certainly
going to blow up next year. We're very close to the edge of the
precipice.
TGR:
Is the problem the debt, or all of the currency that has been pumped
in?
DC:
It's both. We have to really consider what debt is. It's the opposite
of savings because savings means that you've produced more than
you've consumed and put the difference aside. That's how you build
capital. That's how you grow in wealth. On the other side of the
balance sheet is debt, which means you've consumed more than you've
produced. You've mortgaged the future or you're living out of past
capital that somebody else produced. The existence of debt is a
very bad thing.
In a classical
banking system, loans are made only against 100% security and only
on a short-term basis. And only from savings accounts that earn
interest, not from money in checking accounts or demand deposits,
where the depositor (at least theoretically) pays the banker for
safe storage of his funds. These are very important distinctions,
but they've been completely lost. The entire banking system today
is totally corrupt. It's worse than that. Central banking has taken
what was an occasional local problem, a bank failing from fraud
or mismanagement, and elevated it to a national level by allowing
fractional banking reserves and by creating currency for bailouts.
Debt at least consumer debt is a bad thing; it's typically
a sign that you're living above your means. But inflation of the
currency is even worse in its consequences, because it can overturn
the whole basis of society and destroy the middle class.
TGR:
What happens when these time bombs go off?
DC:
There are two possibilities. One is that the central banks and the
governments stop creating enough currency units to bail out their
banks. That could lead to a catastrophic deflation and banks going
bankrupt wholesale. When consumer and business loans can't be repaid,
the bank goes bust. The money created by those banks out of nothing,
through fractional reserve banking, literally disappears. The dollars
die and go to money heaven; the deposits that people put in there
can't be redeemed.
The other possibility
is an eventual hyperinflation. Here the central bank steps in and
gives the banks new currency units to pay off depositors. It's just
a question of which one happens. Or we can have both in sequence.
If there's a catastrophic deflation, the government will get scared,
and feel the need to "do something." And it will need money, because
tax revenues will collapse at exactly the time its expenditures
are skyrocketing so it prints up more, which brings on a
hyperinflation.
We could also
see deflation in some areas of the economy and inflation in others.
For example, the price of beans and rice may fall, relatively speaking,
during a boom because everybody's eating steak and caviar. Then
during a subsequent depression, people need more calories for fewer
dollars, so prices for caviar and steak drop but beans and rice
become more expensive because everybody is eating more of them.
Inflation creates
all kinds of distortions in the economy and misallocations of capital.
When there's a real demand for filet mignon, there's a lot of investment
in the filet mignon industry and not enough in the beans and rice
industry because nobody is eating them. And vice-versa. And it happens
all over the economy, in every area.
TGR:
But inflation rates don't seem to reflect the vast amounts of currency
that central banks have injected into the U.S., European and other
economies. The U.S. inflation rate was 2.93% in January and 2.87%
in February. We haven't seen signs yet either of a hyperinflation
or a serious deflation that we were warned would come with quantitative
easing (QE). Does that mean QE is working after all?
DC:
No. It's not just the immediate and direct consequences of what
they do everybody loves it when trillions of dollars are
created. It feels good to have lots more purchasing media. The problem
arises with the indirect and delayed consequences. All these dollars
and euros and Chinese yuan and Japanese yen that have
been created have basically gone into the banks, but the banks are
not lending them out. The banks are afraid to lend and a lot of
people don't want to borrow because they're afraid of taking on
more debt. So the dollars that have been created, mostly invested
in government paper, sit on the banks' balance sheets. They are
not circulating in the economy at the moment. That's why prices
aren't skyrocketing right now.
That's point
number two, though. Point number one is that I wouldn't trust those
inflation figures in the first place. The governments of Western
Europe and the U.S. fudge inflation figures as certainly as the
Argentine government fudges them, just less overtly and outrageously.
They do that because they want to keep the perception of inflation
down; they don't want people panicking, which is a pity, because
the public should urgently do something to protect their capital.
They also don't want to see Social Security payments and other payments
that are tied to the consumer price index go up. They don't have
the tax revenues to pay for them and will have to print even more
money, which just exacerbates the problem. Official inflation numbers
are unreliable; only somebody very naïve like a TV anchorperson
could possibly believe them.
If you think
of inflation as an increase in the money supply above the increase
in real wealth which is actually what the word means
the inflation rate is actually quite high at the moment. Real wealth
is being created at lower rates than it historically has been, while
the money supply is increasing tremendously. It's just a question
of when that inflation rate manifests itself on a retail level.
You've got to think like a real economist, not a political hack
like Joseph Stiglitz or Paul Krugman. You have to see not just the
immediate and direct consequences of something, but the indirect
and delayed ones.
TGR:
Given that this is an election year in the U.S., won't the government
do everything possible to maintain a stable market and stop inflation?
DC:
Sure, the government wants things stable. I have no doubt it is
trying to keep the stock market up. It wants the stock market to
stay high because pension funds and insurance companies and the
public at large are invested in the stock market. It wants interest
rates low, although artificially low interest rates are an economic
disaster in that they encourage people to borrow more and save less.
It would prefer to see precious metals, and all other commodities,
at low levels. The argument is made that the governments of the
world, especially the U.S. government, are manipulating the prices
of gold and silver to keep them down, because when they increase,
it's like financial alarm bells going off.
But they can't
control the prices of the precious metals. In the real world, cause
has effect. When you create trillions of currency units, eventually
the price of those currency units relative to other things will
go down. That's called inflation. Whether he's lying or he really
believes it, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said he can control the levels
of inflation. When it gets too high, he thinks he can rein it in
somehow.
The current
world monetary system is going to come undone. That's my prediction,
and I'm betting on it massively, personally.
TGR:
You've talked about the possibility of abandoning paper currency
altogether and going to a digital system.
DC:
The most important thing is to get the government out of money.
There should be a high wall between the state and religion and an
equally high wall between the state and the economy. I don't even
like to talk about what governments "should" do as far as money
is concerned because the governments shouldn't be involved in money
period. Money is a medium of exchange and a store of value.
It shouldn't be a political football, nor should it be used as an
indirect form of taxation, which is what inflation is. It should
be a pure, 100% market phenomenon. Central banks should, therefore,
be abolished. Paper currency should cease to exist except
as a receipt for money held on deposit. Historically, that's how
it originated.
You could use
any kind of commodity as money, but gold has proven since the dawn
of civilization to be uniquely well suited for use as money. It's
a market, which is to say a voluntary, phenomenon. Whether you represent
that gold with bank notes printed by individual banks or by digital
currency which I'm sure the world is going to makes
no difference. But having the state in charge of currency is idiotic.
TGR:
You've written about China moving away from the dollar. Do you see
that happening gradually or all of a sudden? And would it be in
favor of its own currency or more investment in gold? What impact
would that have on gold prices?
DC:
First of all, I think the nation-state as a form of organization
is on its way out, and that a 100 years from now people will look
back at countries like China and the U.S. the way we look back at
medieval kingdoms today. In the meantime, the dollar is important
because it's the numéraire for trade all over the world. At the
same time, fewer and fewer people trust it, and they increasingly
realize that it's the unbacked liability of a bankrupt government.
Eventually,
it's going to be replaced by something else. India and Iran are
trading between each other using gold and oil. Why use a piece of
paper issued by a hostile and unreliable third party? The Russians
and the Chinese can see how crazy it is to trade between each other
using dollars, which all have to clear in New York. But people are
still accustomed to using currencies issued by nation-states, and
the U.S. dollar is everywhere and is therefore convenient. But it's
a hot potato. People no longer trust it. I suspect the Chinese yuan
will replace the dollar gradually assuming the Chinese don't
destroy the yuan as well. They're also creating trillions of the
things to keep the economic bubble in China from imploding.
Before the
Chinese yuan can replace the dollar, people must have confidence
in it. The best way they can gain confidence in it is if the volume
of yuan is limited and redeemable by the issuer in something real,
something tangible. That's going to be gold. So I expect China will
continue buying large amounts of gold to back its currency. China
is already the world's largest gold producer. Considering that only
about 6–7 billion ounces of gold have ever been mined in all the
world's history, China alone could drive the price of gold much
higher.
TGR:
At your Recovery Reality Check summit in Florida April
27–29, you'll be talking about how business cycles have been turned
on their heads. Is this the time for investors to sit tight, making
only small adjustments to portfolios, or must they take more drastic
action to protect their wealth or, better yet, profit from volatility?
DC:
I think volatility is going to go way up in the future as the titanic
forces of inflation and deflation fight with each other. This is
a very poor time to make big bets in almost any conventional market
because it's impossible to tell how things will finally settle,
where the next major war will be and so forth. Stock markets around
the world are not cheap now and bond markets are fantastically overpriced.
Currencies are no more than floating abstractions. Commodities have
been in a long bull market, so they're no longer a low-risk bet.
Real estate the most obvious thing for bankrupt governments
to tax is dangerous. In the developed world especially
in the U.S. it floats on a sea of debt, which has driven
it to artificially high levels. It's coming down as we speak, but
it's nowhere near a bottom.
So there are
very few places where people can still attempt to preserve capital.
Everybody is going to be almost forced to be a speculator to try
to stay in the same place. Speculating means capitalizing on politically
caused distortions in the marketplace. That's the proper definition
of the word.
TGR:
What can people speculate on?
DC:
Unfortunately, they have to second-guess where the money will go.
I've always liked resource stocks, especially resource exploration
stocks. It's a tiny market. If a fire gets lit under gold and silver,
and I think it will, companies in this nanosector could explode
10, 20 or 50 times upward in price. It's happened many times in
the past. Right now, these stocks are relatively cheap, so I like
that as a speculative vehicle.
TGR:
Rick Rule has cautioned against generalizing about the entire junior
mining sector as a whole, because so many of these companies don't
find anything. How do you decide which resource investments are
worth looking into? Are there criteria? Is there some kind of a
litmus test that you use?
DC:
Rick is absolutely correct about that. Although the sector is capable
of going upwards 10 or 20 times as a whole, most of the stocks in
it are total garbage. The only gold, uranium, silver or whatever
appears on their stock certificates, not in the ground they control.
There are thousands of these little stocks, and yes, we have criteria
we use to evaluate them. We use a tried-and-true due diligence process
we call The Eight Ps of Resource Stock Evaluation to separate
the wheat from the chaff among speculative investment opportunities.
TGR:
Would you share that with us?
DC:
Sure. This is a guide to help investors ask the right questions
about every individual company they're considering. This list comprehends
the essential, but you could write a book about each of these eight
points.
- People:
Who are the key players in the company and what are the track
records of the companies they've managed? This is by far the most
important criteria.
- Property:
What resources are in hand, and what (if any) are the additional
resources they expect to find? How well proven are they? Assessing
this takes geological and engineering expertise.
- Phinancing:
Does the company have enough cash to meet its next-phase objectives
or have the ability to finance the cost of reaching those objectives?
It's no longer a case of grubstaking a prospector and his mule.
- Paper:
Capital is almost always raised from the issuance of new shares.
Is there a lot of cheap paper out there that will keep the share
price down? Will new or existing warrants or new shares dilute
your own shares? Who owns most of the paper?
- Promotion:
How and when is the company going to get itself (and its stock)
noticed?
- Politics:
Is the country or region mine friendly and stable? Are foreign
investors welcome? Is there environmental resistance?
- Push:
What's going to move this stock? Drill results, merger or acquisition,
increase in the price of the underlying commodity, resolution
of a legal issue?
- Price:
What are the potential price moves of the underlying commodity
that could have either a positive or negative impact on the value
of the company?
TGR:
How hard is it to find a company that passes muster on all eight
counts?
DC:
It's very hard. It's hard enough to look at the basic statistics
of thousands of companies. Then you look at the people behind them.
Generally, we try to find the people first. We stay away from those
who have no history of success and have established that they have
questionable characters. We look for people with long histories
of success or appear to be about to embark on a lifetime of success.
The most important piece is people. That's what we really look for
most of all.
TGR:
Based on all the calamities that could occur, how will you adjust
your investing philosophy?
DC:
Let me put it this way. We're going into something that I call The
Greater Depression, much worse and much different than what happened
in the 1930s. I think my friend Richard Russell said it best: "In
a depression, everybody loses. The winner is the guy who loses the
least." It's very tough to keep capital together today, much less
make it grow in the years to come.
But I think
it's possible. The thing to remember is that most of the world's
real wealth will remain in existence regardless of what happens.
The key is to position yourself so that more of it falls into your
hands as opposed to falling out of your hands. That's what we're
trying to do, to increase our relative share of the wealth in the
world. We're not looking at boom times. What's coming will be the
opposite of what we experienced during the artificial inflationary
boom of the 1990s, where everything was going up stocks,
real estate and so forth. This is a time when, in real terms, most
things will lose value. Most people will experience a real decline
in their standard of living.
TGR:
As we've discussed, at its root, paper currency is a substitute
for something of value. Energy, similar to gold, has intrinsic value.
It's always in demand. In the past, you've expressed optimism about
uranium, natural gas and oil. As the dollar becomes suspect, do
you foresee sources of energy becoming more valuable?
DC:
Absolutely. I'm very bullish on oil. The world runs on fossil fuels
today because they're ideal sources of highly concentrated energy.
Unfortunately, all of the easily available, cheap fossil fuels have
basically been found. The low-hanging fruit is gone. This is what
the peak oil theory is about. Plenty of oil remains, but it's going
to be more expensive to get it. To find oil now requires going to
exotic places without infrastructure and with big political problems.
It requires going much deeper into the ground, exploring under the
ocean, using new technologies, and so forth.
Gas is secondary
to oil when it comes to concentrated sources of energy. Of course,
with the development of new technologies, primarily horizontal drilling
and new fracking techniques, a huge amount of natural gas has become
available all over the world. But it takes tremendous capital to
retrieve it, and it also faces political problems.
But in summary,
I'm bullish on energy of all types. There is plenty of fuel out
there. It's just a question of the price level, so it becomes economic
to retrieve it.
TGR:
So how do you invest in finding the rest of what's out there?
DC:
You look for companies that are exploring for it. One of the important
things that makes me very bullish on oil is that most of the oil
in the world today something like 80% is not owned
and produced by BP Plc, Exxon Mobil Corp., Royal Dutch Shell Plc
and companies like that. It's mostly owned and produced by national
oil companies such as those in Mexico, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.
These state oil companies are universally corrupt and inefficient.
The profits from the oil are generally used as piggybanks by those
governments, not to build capital and find more oil. Furthermore,
where governments allow private exploration, such as Iraq, they
take about 80–90% of the potential profits from oil, which of course
discourages exploration and exploitation of the resource. The problems
are almost entirely political, but they're big problems.
TGR:
Speaking of the politics of energy, are you still bullish on uranium
in light of the politics of what's gone on since the Fukushima meltdown?
DC:
Yes. I've said it before and continue to say it. There's no question
that nuclear power is by far the safest, cleanest and cheapest type
of mass power generation available. Fukushima survived one of the
most severe earthquakes in recorded history with no problem; it's
just a pity they didn't adequately plan for a 45-foot tidal wave
on top of it. In addition, those plants basically were 50-year-old
technology. If it weren't for political obstructions, we'd be using
vastly improved technology. But it's not just uranium. Thorium is
actually a much better fuel from many points of view and probably
would have been used as a fuel instead of uranium except that the
governments of the world found uranium useful for nuclear weapons
as well as nuclear power.
Nuclear power
is definitely the answer, but as you point out, it's a question
of political problems. Across the resource industry, in fact, it's
all politics. When you find a gigantic resource of some type, you
can count on lawsuits, not-in-my-backyard opposition and political
theft. Those are among the reasons that I don't see the resource
industry as a place to make investments. It's only a place where
you can speculate.
TGR:
So what should long-term investors do to protect themselves?
DC:
Because the big problems in the world today all are political, the
critical thing is to diversify politically and internationally.
You can't have all your assets under the control of one government
or in one country. Then, of course, you have to find the right place
to put the money within that framework.
TGR:
How do you do that?
DC:
I can write a book on that.
TGR:
Or stage a summit? You have quite a faculty lined up.
DC:
It is an impressive group. Actually, this summit has dual overarching
purposes. As we've discussed, the massive amounts of money the world's
governments have unleashed in their economies have lit a small fire
of recovery. We're going to talk a lot about whether the world is
truly on a path to recovery or whether investors wouldn't be wise
to develop and implement Plan B now, given that the extreme levels
of debt that were such a major factor in creating the current crisis
have not been reduced. To me, that strongly suggests that this so-called
recovery is unsustainable and calls for moving into Plan B. Part
of Plan B involves identifying optimal investment strategies for
the markets ahead.
TGR:
What sorts of takeaways are in store for people who attend?
DC:
Let's have David Galland, who's been instrumental in preparing for
this summit, respond to that. (A senior market strategist, Galland
is managing director of Casey Research LLC, managing editor of The
Casey Report, International Speculator, Casey
Investment Alert author of Casey's Daily Dispatch.)
David
Galland: We expect the takeaways will be good answers to
many burning questions. As Doug has suggested, the government says
the recovery is real and your broker will tell you it is, yet the
underlying data suggests that it may be a paper tiger. So, what's
the hard truth? Should you be moving aggressively into rebounding
equities? Or is the recovery a mirage that will dissipate in a second
crushing leg down for the economy and traditional investment markets?
What are the road signs you need to pay close attention to? How
can you position your portfolio to do well in either scenario and,
most importantly, to hedge against the worst case? Should you worry
about inflation or deflation? Neither? Or both? Will the gold and
silver you've been holding turn to lead and pull your portfolio
down? Or is loading up on corrections still the right thing to do?
TGR:
These summits are always sold-out affairs. Is this one full already?
DG:
Just a few spots remain as we speak.
Even if you
can't make it to the Casey Research Recovery Reality Check Summit
April 27-29, you can still listen to every piece of actionable investment
advice attendees will hear with the Summit Audio Collection.
This expansive audio set will feature every recorded Summit presentation,
including those from David Stockman, director of the Office of Management
and Budget under President Reagan. . .Harry Dent, author of The
Great Crash Ahead. . .Casey Research Chairman Doug Casey.
. .and 28 other financial luminaries. Pre-order
before the Summit starts and get the entire collection for $100
off.
Want to read
more exclusive Gold Report interviews like this? Sign
up for our free e-newsletter, and you'll learn when new articles
have been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry
analysts and commentators, visit our Exclusive
Interviews page.

April
21, 2012
Doug
Casey (send him mail)
is
a best-selling author and chairman of Casey
Research, LLC., publishers of Casey’s
International Speculator.
Copyright
© 2012 Casey
and Associates
The
Best of Doug Casey
|