Gold didn't move yesterday. It remained at $1,139.

Mortgage delinquencies hit a new record in the third quarter. And producer prices came in lower than expected. These are both indications of a weakening, deflation-prone economy.

Perhaps this is what prompted Mr. Ben Bernanke to tell the world that he may keep rates lower, for longer, than he thought...and perhaps forever.

"Bernanke signals 'extended' low-rate period may become longer," reports Bloomberg.

Today, we discover that "1 in 6 hungry in America last year." That is the headline in the USA Today. If you believe the report, 49 million people went hungry at some point in 2008, the highest number since the government began keeping track in 1995.

Meanwhile, we learn - in the same paper - that "Rising obesity will cost the USA $344 billion." That's what fat people cost the nation annually, equal to 21% of health-care spending.

The two problems should cancel each other out, shouldn't they?

Oddly, the states with the greatest girths are also the poorest. Mississippi is number one in fat. It's also the poorest state. Could it be that fat people are going hungry? Is this a good thing; or a bad thing?

Until tomorrow,

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Lending Rates Will Go Up With Inflation
• Things That Matter in the Economy are Going in the Wrong Direction
• Consumers are Suffering Because European Governments Boosted Spending
• IMF Deems Gold An Idle Asset
• Eurozone Drops GDP Bombs

And today we take up a foul and disagreeable task. We ask ourselves: what if we are wrong?

If you bought gold when we first recommended it, ten years ago, you are in a very comfortable position. Gold sells for more than 4 times as much today. But what should you do now? And what if you didn't go for broke on gold in the early '00s? Is it too late to get in on the bull market?

To give you a warning, in the following windy ambulation we come to no conclusion we haven't come to before. We say gold is going to the moon. If we are wrong about when...we will be delighted sooner than expected...self-satisfied...and insufferable for years. If we are right, we may have to wait a long time before saying "I told you so."

First, the press has certainly noticed the bull market in gold. How could it not? Most reporters say gold is going up simply because the dollar is going down. In the popular press, we found no other explanation. In fact, much of the notice of gold seems to occur within articles about the dollar. We found, for example, that the dollar is at a 15 month low...and, coincidentally, gold has just hit an all-time high.

There's something lopsided about this account of things. If the yellow metal has hit a record high, how come the dollar is down for only 15 months and not since the Flood? Makes you wonder if the dollar isn't the whole story.

Elsewhere, we find that the dollar is trading at $1.49 per euro. Wait a minute. We remember the dollar at the exact same level...was it a year ago...more...? And it's been at that same level, more or less, all the while gold has gone up more than 10%.

It's not the fall of the dollar that is driving the gold market, in other words, it's something else...it's the fall of ALL paper currencies. For when the dollar goes down, so do the rest of them - more or less. No nation wants its currency to rise too much against the greenback. Americans are still the world's biggest spenders. They spend dollars...not rubles...not euros...not zloties. A nation whose currency rises against the dollar is in a competitively weaker position. Its costs - in local currency - go up while its sales - in dollars - go down (it has to charge higher prices). Typically, central banks buy up dollars with money created for that purpose...thus increasing their own money supply and thus decreasing the value of their own local currencies relative to the dollar.

Since all the world's central banks, more or less, are doing this, all paper currencies are going down together - compared to gold.

But wait, wouldn't they be going down together against everything else too? If currencies are getting weaker...shouldn't they be getting weaker against oil...and McDonalds' hamburgers...and woolen underwear? The oil price is at $78 - where it's been stuck for a while. Oil is a special case, but almost all consumer prices are stuck too. Take out energy and food, and consumer prices are deflating in the US. Put back in the energy and food and they're just stuck. There is no sign of generalized consumer inflation - not in the USA and not in Europe either.

The only thing that is going up is gold. There is a bull market in gold and gold alone. But why?

According to the law of supply and demand, you expect the price of a thing to fall when its supply increases faster than the demand for it. In today's news are two reports on gold production. One, from South Africa, tells that a scientist says the nation's residual gold in-the- ground is much less than expected. It has been overstated by 900%, he says. Another report shows the output of from the gold mining industry clearly topping out. Gold supply, in other words, is increasing, but not as fast as it used to.

The supply of paper money, on the other hand, needs no new discoveries. Since there have been huge increases in the monetary base of paper money all over the world, it is reasonable to expect the price of paper money to go down. Gold, traditionally the thing that paper money is priced in, should go up. Speculators are buying it now in anticipation. Even central banks are buying again. And nearly everyone expects the price to continue going up.

As near as we can tell, gold is properly priced already. Comparisons are rough, but an ounce of it appears to buy about as much stuff as it did 2,000 years ago. You can buy a suit of clothes for an ounce of gold - no problem. Go to Wal-Mart; you can buy 4 suits.

As Roy W. Jastram wrote in his 1977 book, The Golden Constant, gold's "price has been remarkably similar for centuries at a time. Its purchasing power in the middle of the twentieth century was very nearly the same as in the midst of the seventeenth century."

Gold...or the people who speculate in it...may be looking ahead. Or, they are dreaming. If gold is already about where it should be why would you pay more? You must expect paper currencies to go down...to buy less stuff. In other words, you'd have to be anticipating a fall- off in the value of the paper currency.

It may come to pass exactly as they imagine it. Gold may rise and rise and rise...as paper currencies fall and fall and fall some more. In that case, we here at The Daily Reckoning headquarters as well as all of our dear readers who followed our advice 10 years ago will be delighted. Gold may hit $1,500 by the end of the year. By the end of next year it may be $3,000. By the year after, well...who knows...? "We told you so," we will say.

But there is almost always more under Heaven than speculators think. When we look into it, we see gaudy increases in the monetary base...but only very modest increases in M2, the money that buys stuff. What's more the rate of increase for M2 has fallen in half over the last 8 months. It's now only about 7% annually in the US. And when we look at the CPI we see no increase at all. And despite the 'recovery,' unemployment is still rising and house prices are still falling. So, if speculators see the price of stuff going up in paper currency terms, they must be looking way over our heads.

To more fully describe our own state of mind, we don't doubt that all the liquidity added to the world's monetary system will eventually be soaked up by paper currencies. But it could take a long time; we might be dead before it actually happens.

But since we are entertaining the possibility that we might be wrong; let us look at what is going on in more detail. If there were a real recovery - as announced in the world's newspapers and proclaimed by its stock markets - you'd expect a rising increase in demand...leading to higher prices...leading to a higher gold price.

Yesterday's news brought word of greater retail spending than anticipated. This was greeted as more evidence that a recovery is actually underway. But upon examination, we discover that the evidence comes almost all from auto sales. We also find that the number crunchers contributed to the lift by revising figures for September. These are month to month movement numbers. So you can raise October's number simply by lowering the number for September.

What's more, while sales went up...auto prices actually went down - in paper dollar terms. This doesn't sound inflationary to us.

Meanwhile, news reports said that fewer people are defaulting on credit card debt. The reports also tell us that delinquencies on credit card debt are up. So, we'd have to call that a draw.

And then there's the news from GM. The giant, government-owned auto company says it will repay its loans from the feds earlier than expected. But wait...we also find that the company continues to lose money. How then will it repay debt? Perhaps by refinancing!

Other reports are similarly confusing and inconclusive. Profits are up on Wall Street. But wait...sales are down. You can increase profits by cutting expenses (getting rid of employees, mainly). But you can't increase sales. And as long as sales are falling you have to expect lower profits in the future. (Stock market buyers...take note.)

Our colleagues over at The 5-Min. Forecast sent through this chart, illustrating the "recovery that wasn't."

"With the majority of publicly traded companies done reporting third quarter earnings," writes 5 editor, Ian Mathias, "the trend is clear: Profits were way better than expected, revenue was flat at best.

"Of what little we recall from freshman year, Finance 101 insists that profit equals revenue minus costs. Thus there really can't be any questions left as to how the market pulled off this quarter...companies are simply trimming the fat at an incredible clip. Not exactly a long- term plan for growth."

The New York Times reports that job losses continue to be "deep and enduring." Mortgage applications are running lower than they were 9 years ago. "More households report food shortages," says a Wall Street Journal headline. And insiders are still selling their own companies.

So, it still looks to us as if we are in a depression...one that will take many years to sort out. It is unlikely that the bull market in gold will reach its final blow-off top while the depression continues. But stranger things have happened. Eventually, gold will reach the apogee of its bull market. And when it does, we want to be ready for it. We will celebrate with champagne and sparklers.

Still, we wouldn't get out the party hats...not just yet.

Until tomorrow,

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Gold is in a Bull Market
• We are Confident the Bull Market in Gold is Not Over
• Investors to Drive Next Leg of Bull Market in Gold
• What Happens to Gold When High Inflation, Excess Cash, and Falling Dollar Jolts Economy?
• A Gold Standard, Without Gold

And counter to our prediction of an imminent, counter-trend U.S. dollar rally, the dollar is most definitely not surging. Take a look at the chart below. We've been writing about the decline of the dollar for nigh on ten years. So we looked at a ten year chart to tally up the damage. It is considerable.

Click to enlarge

What's at stake with the interpretation of this chart? If the dollar rallies on short covering from the dollar carry trade (a BIG if), then other "risk" assets like gold, stocks, and emerging markets would probably sell off. And yes Australian stocks, that includes you. As well as the Aussie dollar.

The chart shows that the index's 50-week moving average is set to cross below its 200-week moving average. That is mixed news. The first time it happened on this chart was back in early 2003. That was the early days of a long decline in the index. The second time, though the move failed to confirm the "flight to safety" rally of 2008 had staying power in 2009.

Once the fear that gripped markets in 2008 went away, the investment world sold the dollar and started borrowing en masse to buy other, higher-yielding currencies and assets (like the Aussie dollar and resource stocks). That's where we are now.

But based on the chart, is the next move down in the dollar index a new low, which the crossing of the long-term MA by the short-term MA would suggest? Or is it a false move? Will the dollar quickly and violently rally for some reason (geopolitical perhaps) that currently remains unknown to the human beings of this world?

"It's an interesting chart," said our technical analyst Murray Dawes. "But it is not useful for timing your moves out of or into trades related to the dollar's movement."

"So you're saying our chart doesn't have any useful information from a trader's perspective?"

"Not really."

Murray promised to show us HIS dollar index chart tomorrow. We'll bring it to you, live and in colour. But in the meantime, we think the one piece of important information communicated by our chart is that the dollar's trend is down. But there IS a catch.

The catch is that when this many people are this uniformly bearish, everyone is probably wrong. Consider this a warning then, that a dollar rally is just the sort of thing that will lead to a correction in the gold price and the stock market. We won't speculate on the sort of things that could lead to a dollar rally. But surely they're out there and sooner or later they'll come.

The other possibility is that the dollar is in its death throes and that this is the big one, in currency terms. That is such a momentous and disastrous event that people consider it both kooky and unlikely, not to mention undesirable to a predictable and comfortable world. But it IS possible.

And do you get the feeling that this kind of manic melt up rally is the sort of irrational frenzy that comes just before everything goes haywire? Haywire is not a precise financial term. So what do we mean?

We meant that the world enjoyed a 20-year economic relationship based on a fundamentally unbalanced global economy. Manufacturing capacity migrated to Asia where wages were lower. For awhile, this was mostly good news in Western countries. Goods got cheaper but jobs didn't vanish.

Now the situation is not so pleasant. The world is awash in manufacturing over-capacity, especially in China. Wage deflation (in the Western world) looks like a long-term trend, leading to a lower standard of living. This wage deflation is occurring at exactly the same time that Western governments are encountering demographic crises of ageing populations.

We all knew the ageing of the Boomers would put pressure on public finances right around now. But no one reckoned on a global financial crisis further saddling the public balance sheet with debt. And no one reckoned that Western wages and incomes would be falling at just the time people needed them most. And no one reckoned that savers would lose the most from low interest rates on fixed income - even though those low rates are keeping the American housing sector on life support.

It's a bit of global impasse. America's needed structural adjustment has come. Households and businesses are reducing debt, trying to live within their means. But the net adjustment to the American balance sheet is not happening because public sector debt is growing so fast.

Meanwhile, the other obvious adjustment is that the Chinese currency ought to be allowed to strengthen. For political and social reasons though, China will not allow this. It means China is actually adding to its industrial over capacity. It is conjuring up the world's largest ever bubble in fixed asset investment, including commercial real estate.

It is easy to see why China is reluctant to allow a stronger Yuan. Exports account for 39% of Chinese GDP. The Chinese economy, and probably the Communist Party itself, cannot survive on unleashed Chinese domestic demand. They need American markets. But American consumers - in addition to reducing debt - are now realising that the focus on finance over manufacturing from American policy makers has worked out for Washington and Wall Street, but not terribly well for the average American worker.

Where do we go from here? How about the blame game. U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner once blamed the Chinese for being currency manipulators. He back-tracked later. And yesterday, Liu Mingkang, the chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission, had a go at America.

"The continuous depreciation in the dollar, and the US government's indication that, in order to resume growth and maintain public confidence, it basically won't raise interest rates for the coming 12 to 18 months, has led to massive dollar arbitrage speculation." He is blaming the U.S. for fuelling a destabilising global bubble.

Of course that bubble is felt most acutely because China pegs its currency to the dollar. China is right to blame the U.S. for manipulating its currency to try and improve its competitive position. And China is right to worry about the value of its dollar-denominated assets in a world of exploding U.S. debt supply.

But China has put itself in this position. And here we are at the end of 2009 with a world still fundamentally un-adjusted to a new, workable currency arrangement. The world remains burdened by trillions in assets purchased with debt. Those assets linger on bank balance sheets, on government life support but fundamentally lifeless at fictitious book value prices.

And meanwhile, the China-US currency arrangement has fuelled a global bubble. Australia is part of this bubble, too. The question is how it will end. In the U.S., the housing market looms as the Achilles heel of the economy. It could strike households, banks, and the government again in the next 12 months are more mortgages reset at higher rates (with lower home values).

If the event that pops this bubble comes from America, look for the supply of credit to the emerging world to dry up again. And though Australia is not a developing economy, we saw last time what happened when U.S. credit markets imploded. Australian banks had to get a government guarantee to borrow money in the wholesale market.

We'd suggest that lending for residential housing and commercial real estate would take a real dip in Australia on another U.S. housing crisis (even if Aussie banks aren't exposed to actual U.S. housing-backed RMBS and CDOs. You don't have to own toxic debt to be impacted by it.

If the bubble pricking comes from China, what then? Well, China does everything big. So a Chinese bust would be world-class. It's a subject that requires its own Daily Reckoning. More tomorrow.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• CRB Index Correction Likely to Go Further
• U.S. Markets Could Rally on Oil Price Decline
• Price of Gold Communicates U.S. Monetary and Fiscal Policy is Lousy
• The Aussie Dollar as a Measure of Global Risk Appetite
• Chinese Steel Price to Rise in Wake of Coal and Iron Price Hike

It takes water to produce energy and energy to produce clean water. That nexus creates a number of profit possibilities. Sometimes, they are not so obvious. But often, a company that possesses expertise in water treatment will possess a related expertise in the energy field. The connection between water and energy is at least as old as the process of pumping water into old oil fields to boost production.

But the connection between these two precious fluids is changing quite a bit.

Let's take a look at one of the less-obvious connections...

You may not realize this, but two-thirds of oil discovered stays in the ground. The average recovery rate is only about 35%. What if we could recover more of the oil we've already discovered?

If the recovery rate improved to 50%, the world's recoverable oil would increase by 1.2 trillion barrels. It would double today's proven reserves, says the IEA. That much oil makes even a cynical old oilman catch a gleam in his eye and starts his heart aflutter. Indeed, lots of big brains churn away at this problem day and night.

"It's the prize for the next half century," says Howard Mayson, vice president for technology at British oil giant BP, quoted in this morning's Wall Street Journal. BP relies heavily on enhanced-recovery methods. These methods aim to improve that oil recovery rate.

As The Wall Street Journal reports:

"Enhanced recovery is a lifeline for the biggest oil companies, such as Exxon Mobil Corp. and BP, which are under intense pressure from shareholders to keep ramping up production and gaining access to fresh reserves. But that's hard to do when the companies are shut out of the oil-rich Middle East and places like Russia. So they rely more and more on existing fields, some of which have been producing oil already for decades."

It is like squeezing a sponge ever tighter to extract the most of what you can get. The old method is to simply flood the reservoir with water. The idea is to create enough pressure to make it easier to pump the oil out. It is not very efficient, but it works for a time. It is also becoming a bigger problem to secure the water supply. That's why we see oil companies buying water rights out West. Currently, the shale oil plays consume a lot of water.

Instead of using water, some companies will pump the reservoir with carbon dioxide. Companies used to store carbon dioxide in old unused reservoirs. Using this method of enhanced oil recovery, they put that carbon dioxide to work. BP uses this method out in its Prudhoe Bay reservoir, to great effect. Recovery rates there are 60%. Now Prudhoe Bay, which people in the 1980s once thought would cease pumping oil in 30 years, looks to be good for another 50 years.

The WSJ describes another method BP uses: "flooding reservoirs with polymers that expand like popcorn when they come into contact with hot rocks, thus flushing more oil out of difficult-to-reach nooks."

The name of that polymer is BrightWater. One company has a patent on this material and makes it for a profit. That company is Nalco Holding (NLC:NYSE), a company I recommended several months ago to the subscribers of Capital & Crisis. BP uses BrightWater in Argentina and Pakistan. "BP says the additional oil the new technology will produce over the next 20 years is roughly equivalent to finding a major new field," reports the WSJ.

"Nalco," you say, "but isn't Nalco is one of the world's largest water purification companies for industrial companies?" This is what we mean by energy-water nexus. The two are related. And Nalco sits right in the middle of that nexus.

Last year, Nalco's energy services segment was a bright spot. Sales grew 17% organically for the year. In the fourth quarter, sales were up 23% despite the steep oil price decline. In that segment is Nalco's enhanced oil recovery (EOR) business.

CEO Erik Fyrwald commented on this business in a quarterly conference call. "We are in with a lot of oil companies explaining and talking to them about it," he says. "We believe as oil prices come back up, [EOR will be a] really big growth opportunity, just delayed for a period of time."

The delay stems from the fact that many oil companies slashed their exploration and production budgets last year, when oil and gas prices were falling. But it seems inevitable that as the big oil reservoirs dwindle, the EOR business will be big down the road. Of course, EOR is only one of the many valuable things Nalco does in the energy-water nexus. It is no wonder why Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway is the biggest shareholder.

Nalco is a long-term buy.

Regards,

Chris Mayer
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Water Usage by Big Companies
• Unsustainable Energy Trends
• Price of Water Rises in China
• Buying Oil on Sale as U.S. Dollar Gets Weaker
• Top Resource Prices in 2008: Food, Water, Energy & Metal

Yes, dear reader, even our heroine, Angela Merkel, is joining the fools' parade. In a front-page feature in yesterday's International Herald Tribune we learn that Ms. Merkel is bringing Germany in line with the rest of the world - by increasing the public deficit to over 6% of GDP.

"Germany chooses growth over paying debt," says the misleading headline.

But 6% is only half the US level...and the UK is nearing 15%!

The raw news: the Dow fell 93 points yesterday. Gold held above $1,100. There's no sign of panic. But we keep our Crash Alert flag flying anyway; you never know.

We're in Rome...actually in the airport...on our way back to London. Alitalia offered the best deal to Buenos Aires. But the plane was a disappointment. The food was good; the hostesses were pretty; but the seats in business class didn't fully recline. After the first 10 hours, we were very uncomfortable. And pity the poor folks in economy!

But if you want to be an "international man," as our friend Doug Casey termed it, you have put up with some inconvenience. Why would you want to be an "international man?" As another old friend, Marc Faber, observes, it pays to travel. You get a broader perspective. And you realize that many things your compatriots take for granted others take for absurd. "The more you look, the more you see," is our dictum.

One thing Americans take for granted is that they will always be the richest, most successful people on earth. They think that because that is what they have always known. The US economy became the biggest in the world before 1900. Americans had just what it took to become the richest people on the planet. They worked hard. They saved their money. They had little government interference. They had the industrial revolution at their backs...and nothing in their way. And they had a dollar that was 'as good as gold.' By the time the baby boomers were born the US had such a big lead over the rest of the world, it seemed like nothing could stop it. Free enterprise guaranteed new innovations and new wealth. Democracy guaranteed a political system that would adapt to the needs of the evolving economy.

But nothing lasts forever. As it matured, the US economy and its political system became more and more rigid and more and more costly, with handouts and bailouts...at every level. Large companies are protected. Millions of people are encouraged not to work. The whole financial industry is dipped in honey. And the whole population is urged not to save, but to spend. Why bother to save for retirement; there's Social Security. Why bother to save for health care emergencies; there's the government's new overhaul of the medical system! Why bother to save at all; the government has fixed short-term rates so low you get nothing for your trouble.

On our travels what we notice is that there are a lot of smart people in the world. And they're all sweating, striving, and angling to get ahead. You never know who will win the race, but you can be sure that no one will stay in the lead forever.

"US Wages Out of Balance," says The New York Times. It is pointing out the obvious. Americans are paid too much, compared to other people in the world who work just as hard and who now - thanks largely to the feds - have as much or more capital than we do.

Wages in the US will come down - probably thanks to unemployment and inflation. So will US living standards compared to the rest of the world.

Meanwhile...back to Angela...

Generations of German central bankers learned their lesson. They saw what happened when hyperinflation ran wild in the '20s. The middle class was wiped out in a matter of days. People lost faith, not only in the Deutsche Mark, but in Germany itself...and in all the old values. The next thing they knew, the Chancellor was wearing a silly uniform and they were on the road to Hell.

More recently, the last generation of German central bankers worried about the euro. They had no doubt about themselves. They had the backbone to protect their new currency. But what about the Italians? And the Greeks? And the Irish?

Well, they can fret no more. Now, the German deficit is higher than the Italian deficit.

Why would they do such a thing? They have the usual poppycock explanations - countercyclical spending, the need to maintain social services as tax revenues fall, the need to bailout the East, (see below) etc. But the real reason is that the old German economists are dead. One of the last of them was our colleague Kurt Richebächer.

Every time we saw him, Kurt would complain about American and English economists.

"Ya...you Anglo-Saxon economists are ruining the world," he would say. Kurt had no truck with Keynesianism. Or monetarism. Or any other of the fads in economics. Besides, he had lived through Germany's hyperinflation, the rise of National Socialism, WWII, partition, and finally, reunion. He knew that there were no free lunches...no easy fixes...and no panaceas. He knew too that people who promised miracles were dangerous frauds. Wealth is created by work...saving...innovation...investment...and perseverance. There are no miracles. No short cuts.

While wealth is created by work and saving, it is destroyed by consumption and debt. When you borrow money, you have to pay it back. Then, you must draw down your wealth...reduce your living standard...and cut into the capital you laid away in years past. You can try to squirm and dodge...but you just make the situation worse.

Kurt was right.

But now Kurt is dead. A new generation of economists has taken over. Born after the war, they know hard times only from movies and history books. They haven't forgotten the old truths; they never learned them. Instead, they probably did their training at Harvard or Chicago...and studied nonsense...such as the Efficient Market Hypothesis and Modern Portfolio Theory.

They think the key to prosperity is spending. Consumers spend until they can't go on. Then it's up to the government. That's why the Germans are running such a high deficit. The think they need to keep up spending - at all costs - in order to boost the economy. As Kurt used to point out, it makes no sense theoretically...and there's no evidence that it works in practice either. Every time governments have intervened with large dollops of countercyclical spending they have made a mess of things...either by stimulating the private sector to further acts of reckless insolvency...or by blocking the process of correction.

It's all claptrap. Angela, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• The Greatness of a Depression is Commensurate to the Government’s Efforts to Prevent It
• French Model of Economy Allows Meddling from the State
• Ben Bernanke “Respectfully Disagreed” With Angela Merkel
• The French are Feeling Pretty Smug
• Pension System: A Conversation With Chile’s Former Labor Minister

That's fantastic! Just 18 more months before we can put all of this behind us. Why didn't they aim to overcome the crisis a year ago? Oh well. Better late than never.

Of course, it is possible the leaders of the APEC nations have no idea what to do, and certainly don't agree on how to manage their currencies. The Journal reports that everyone is badgering the Americans and the Chinese to quit their cozy currency arrangement. America has effectively devalued the dollar with low interest rates, and the Chinese have matched the devaluation because of the semi-formal currency peg.

The results is a global race to the bottom, otherwise known as competitive currency devaluation. Exporting nations must mimic the Fed and keep rates low (or sell their own currencies and buy dollars) to stay competitive. It suits China and America for different reasons.

America's weak dollar hasn't exactly helped exports like everyone expected. In fact, the trade deficit widened last month on a weaker dollar, mostly due to huge oil imports. But as long as U.S. interest rates are kept low, the housing market will not implode. The weak dollar suits the Fed.

And a weak Yuan suits the Chinese for now. They remain the world's low cost producers. And their goods get even cheaper when the Yuan declines with the dollar. More market share is good for Chinese producers. But it doesn't make any other exporters trying to compete in manufactured or consumer goods very happy. About the only people, or metal, made happy by the current state of affairs is gold.

The weekend edition of the Australian Financial Review has gold on the cover, incidentally. You can see a picture of it a few paragraphs down. Underneath the giant golden letters it reads, "Why you shouldn't laugh about gold hitting $US2000 an oz." But if anyone's laughing, it's a nervous laughter.

Why? Well, the fact that the gold made the cover of the AFR confirmed our view that it was an excellent month to research uranium stocks. That's just what Diggers and Drillers editor Alex Cowie did. He published his first report as the full-time editor of Diggers and Drillers on Friday. It was on uranium, including one specific recommendation.

We talked with Alex about whether to write about gold this month or uranium. Trouble is, he'd already written about gold in October. We've been getting a lot of questions here at the DR about gold. The gold price is making new highs in U.S. dollars ($1,123.40 in the futures market last week), but hasn't carried over into Aussie dollar.

The strong Aussie dollar has capped the Aussie gold price for now. You can read what Alex has to say about it here. The short version, though, is that Aussie investors looking for leverage to higher gold prices ought to look at producers who incur cash production costs in U.S. dollars. This keeps costs under control, but ought to benefit share prices (all things being equal) if gold continues to make new highs.

November 2009	Winter 2006
Source: The Australian Financial Review	Source: Diggers and Drillers

By the way, a report predicting $2,000 gold was the very first letter we mailed when we began our financial publishing business in 2006. The prediction seemed a bit crazy back then. And truth be told, the report bombed. That is, very few readers took us up on the offer to subscribe to Diggers and Drillers and see what else we had to say about gold stocks and the resource industry.

And to be fair, the prediction hasn't come true...yet. Most Aussie gold stocks have lagged the move in bullion prices. And some people still think that gold itself as a genuine asset class is a crazy idea.

The author of the AFR's piece, Robert Guy, is grudging in his recognition of gold's recent performance: "Often dismissed as cranks and conspiracy theorists, true believers may have found vindication in gold's record-breaking run, which has underscored the migration of the mainstream to the long-held world view of these fringe dwellers."

And then he can't help himself. "Gold bugs' dystopian vision of debased currencies, enfeebled banks, debt-burdened governments resorting to the printing press, coupled with the menacing spectre of inflation, presents a worrying analogue to reality," he adds.

An 'analogue to reality'? Last we checked, all those things Guy mentions weren't just prophetic visions. They ARE reality. The real vision - in the sense of a something that appears in fevered recesses of the mind but has no existence in the physical world - is that government-led efforts to revive the economy by taking on more debt have actually worked and that everything is getting better and better.

But then, the idea that investors who buy gold are crazed believers is a convenient way of dismissing monetary history. Close your eyes and pretend everything is all right!

To understand the investment benefits of gold, you don't have to "believe" in gold in the way that, say, you have to believe in the Virgin birth or the resurrection to call yourself a Christian. You just have to understand how gold has always been part of a sound money system and how it promotes responsible government and personal liberty. It is not an act of faith. It's a rational conclusion.

Further, gold's physical attributes - durability, divisibility, transportability, relatively scarcity, and its sameness in all places - make it such a useful medium of exchange. To the extent that those qualities make for really useful money, gold does have an inherent value. Gold is very good money, which is why it's being remonetised after years in the Keynesian wilderness.

But we've written so much about gold in the past you are probably sick to death of it. So we'll conclude with two points. A sovereign debt crisis is brewing because Western Welfare states refuse to live within their means and are increasing public sector debt. This makes their currencies dangerous to own and their bonds subject to default. At the very least, most paper currencies face major devaluations.

The second point is that gold bullion is not a panacea for the problem of fiat currencies. It's a good start. But if you think the monetary world will somehow muddle through, then gold stocks give you leverage to a higher gold price. As eye-catching as gold's recent gains have been, we reckon most investors haven't begun to stock up and gold.

While the easy money in gold has been made, the big money has yet to be made.

All that said, we think Alex's timing on uranium is good. Turning to your attention to those asset classes that no one wants to touch is hard to do. For one, you have to be conscious that what everyone is talking about is either fully priced or over-priced. Secondly, it takes some courage to step into a market that everyone hates, or finds so uninteresting that it's not worth the time.

Granted, uranium does not exactly constitute a hated asset. But it hasn't been in the limelight lately, has it? There was a small story in this weekend's Australian, though. Energy Resources Australia's CEO Rob Atkinson says the pieces are in place for a uranium shortage down the track.

He cited three factors. First, the GFC cut off the capital for new mine development. This happened with oil and gold, too, both of which were facing production peaks anyway. But in the uranium industry, you've had major interruptions of mine supply from two sources that were expected to be a lot more productive, BHP's Olympic Dam and Cameco's Cigar Lake mine.

On the demand side is the resurgence in the world's fleet of nuclear reactors, which use uranium as fuel. Of course nuclear power remains controversial in some places (like Australia) even as it figures prominently as part of the energy portfolio in other places (like China and India).

No matter how you "feel" about it, it's pretty likely that nuclear will emerge as the clear winner as an alternative to hydrocarbons. Who knows what kind of madness the world's leaders will agree to. The idea that the world can give up burning coal and still maintain a comfortable standard of living is belly-laughable.

But even if next month's climate change summit in Copenhagen fails to produce a breakthrough (and it already looks like that may be the case), uranium should come out of the summit...er...glowing. And don't get us started on that summit. We've heard the interviews and read the articles. It does indeed look like a massive power grab. But that is a subject for another day.

As an investment issue, uranium stocks present better value right now than some other commodity stocks. One reason is that prices in the spot uranium market have trended between US$40 and US$50 all year. They soared to US$140 along with oil in 2007, but have since fallen, stabilised, and consolidated.

In other words, uranium is one of the assets to resist the rising tide of global liquidity. That doesn't mean it's coiled like a spring and will inevitably rise. But there are some good reasons to take a closer look at it now. And Alex pointed out an important fact in his November article: future uranium producers will have to produce above a certain number of pounds per year for at least ten years in order to enter into agreements with the utility companies that buy uranium for fuel.

That means that not just any explorer or developer is going to win the uranium sweepstakes if prices begin to rise in the spot market. And, of course, if global GDP and industrial production again collapse because of a second credit crisis, demand for electricity - including future projections - will go down. Maybe the world will build fewer nuclear reactors than planned, needing less uranium than expected.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• AUD Price of Gold a Measure of Gold’s Strength Against Other Currencies
• Good Month for Aussie Stocks, While U.S. Stocks Fell to Close the Quarter
• Uranium: A Carbon-friendly Substitute for Coal
• Thorium as a Nuclear Fuel
• Uranium and Gold Exploration Spending Both Down in Last Year

For the past 60 years, corporate debt has grown faster than the economy - 4.1% annually for debt, compared with only 2.7% for the economy as a whole. In short, more and more debt went toward producing each dollar of GDP growth.

What if this 60-year trend reverses?

In fact, I think that is the likely scenario. The deleveraging will take some time...and it won't be fun.

"Today's overleveraged assets will become tomorrow's underleveraged assets, and vice versa," QB Partners, a hedge fund, explained in a recent letter to shareholders.

What will this new world look like? More people will save more money. And they will focus more on preserving that wealth than on making a big score. We've been here before. Michael Farrell, the chairman of Annaly, says the psychology of people will change as it did for those of 1930s, as he discussed on his company's first-quarter conference call:

Exhausted by the uncertainties of the 1930s and 1940s, the older generation just felt lucky to be alive and they settled into a time of saving, preservation of capital and lowered expectations as consumers.

If that kind of financial orthodoxy takes root, then leveraged assets like real estate and bank balance sheets face a long period of stagnant returns as they continue to deliver - that is, as borrowers and lenders ratchet down the debt on these things. (I find it ridiculous that government officials want us to believe that the US banking system is OK at 25-to-1 leverage. The banking system's insolvency will become more apparent as it continues to take losses from bad debts made during the bubble.)

Deleveraging puts pricing pressure on leveraged assets. Banks must raise capital, diluting their shareholders and hurting their stock prices. Real estate owners must sell property to raise capital to defend other properties, thus putting pricing pressures on real estate assets. And so on...

So as an investor, it will pay better to stick with the unlevered assets, which face no such head winds. After all, there is no pressure to sell an asset with no debt, no ticking clock. "What are the most underleveraged assets?" you ask. QB Partners gives the answer: hard assets and natural resources.

The ultimate unlevered hard asset may be humble old gold.

In fact, something important is happening in the gold markets right now. All through the 1990s to the present day, the world's central banks were net sellers of gold. Europe's central banks, for instance, have sold 3,800 tonnes of gold in the last 10 years. According to The Financial Times, this move has cost them $40 billion, and that's with gold at $900 an ounce.

Well, too bad for them. But suddenly, that recent habit of selling gold is changing. Last year, central banks sold only 46 tonnes, which was the lowest amount in 10 years.

As the FT reports: "Sales in Europe have slowed to a crawl and fresh demand is emerging elsewhere and the financial crisis has helped to highlight gold's value in turbulent times." In fact, we may soon see central banks flip to net buyers of gold.

China has doubled its holdings of gold this year and is now the world's fifth largest holder of the metal. China is likely to be a buyer of gold for years because its gold holdings are still very small relative to the size of its total reserves. Gold represents only 1.6% of China's reserves, versus a global average of nearly 11%. To further diversify its reserves - just to get to average - would require significant amounts of gold.

In a post-2008, deleveraging world, it is the unleveraged assets that will outperform against those saddled with debt. It's another plank in the case for gold, which just seems to get stronger with each passing month. "A new chapter has begun in the gold market," the FT opines. Indeed, it has.

The International Monetary Fund, never known as a wise handler of money, is selling a bunch of gold. India bought half of it. A number of emerging market central banks are also upping their gold exposure. Maybe these CBs are onto something.

Russia's gold holdings now make up 4% of its foreign reserves, compared with only 2.2% at the beginning of the year. Smaller central banks are also being crafty. Ecuador's gold holdings have more than doubled since the start of the year - to 54.7 tons, from only 26.3 tons. Gold now represents 32% of that country's reserves. Even Venezuela is buying gold. Gold now makes up 36% of its reserves, compared with only 23% in 2009.

So who is the sucker here?

Perhaps central bankers see more clearly than most what the effect of all their money creation will be. In recent months, we've seen a truly unprecedented boom in bank reserves. Bank reserves drive money creation. More money means money buys less - and the gold price should rise.

Then there is this chart of the Shadow Gold Price. In the old days of the Bretton Woods Agreement, countries had to maintain certain ratios of gold against their currencies. The Shadow Gold Price aims to replicate this discipline. So for the US, the Shadow Gold Price is Federal Reserve Bank liabilities (bank reserves) plus money in circulation divided by US gold holdings. Also on the chart, you can see the spot price of gold.

The important thing here is that you see how massive amounts of money creation have barely made an impact at all in the gold price - so far. Gold is fundamentally cheap compared with all the money added to the system in recent months.

As Paul Brodsky and Lee Quaintance of the hedge fund QB Partners write:

"If one allows for even a small probability of a future monetary system that reflects more honest/tangible money, then a quick glance at the graph above makes it easy to conclude that spot gold is fundamentally cheap. Even if this is too far a stretch for market participants skeptical of such a radical change in monetary policy, it is reasonable to conclude that the prices of spot gold and the Shadow Gold Price should converge somewhat over time."

They note that the spot gold price has never been so cheap compared with the Shadow Gold Price. For parity to set in, gold would have to trade for $16,000 per ounce! No one is predicting $16,000 per ounce gold. In any case, it shows you the risk of holding paper - and bonds - on the eve of a massive devaluation of the dollar. Maybe the central bankers of Russia, Venezuela and Ecuador understand all of this better than they let on and that's why they are buyers of gold.

It seems pretty obvious to me that if you create a lot of money, you are going to destroy the value of that money. And in that case, you want to own something other than that money.

Regards,

Chris Mayer
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• India Beats China to Walk Away With 200 Tonnes of IMF Gold
• IMF Deems Gold An Idle Asset
• Stock Prices Down Signals Bears to Hold onto Cash, Treasuries and Gold
• Gold Bought by Some of America’s Most Successful Investors
• Fed Trying to Push Private Investors into Riskier Asset Classes

Can anything stop stocks and gold?

Trees do not grow to the sky, dear reader. And for every bounce there is a bust.

"It's amazing; the US is doing everything that Japan did wrong," said a friend yesterday.

Let's see, in the 1980s Japan's corporate leaders thought they were going to take over the world. Investors thought so too. They expanded. They wheeled. They dealed. Prices shot up and they all thought they were geniuses.

In the '80s, everyone wanted to be Japanese. Management consultants used Japanese words to describe commonplace insights. For example, instead of saying that businesses always need to try to do things better, they referred to "kaizen" as if it were the secret of success. And US economists urged the Reagan Administration to have an "industrial policy" - because that was what Japan had. Japanese businesses were the envy of the world. Japan was the world's second largest economy. But in growth and stock prices it was Numero Uno.

It turned out, as it always does, that Japan did not have the secret to everlasting success. Instead, what it had was what comes before a fall. The stock market crashed in Tokyo in 1989. The Japanese economy entered a recession. At first, the experts believed it was temporary. They urged investors to take advantage of the opportunity to buy into Japan, Inc. at record low prices. They thought Japanese industry was unstoppable...unbeatable. It would recover in no time, they said.

But Japan, Inc. didn't recover. Instead, it went into a long, drawn-out recession that lasted year after year...with on-again, off again deflation...and several stock market rallies. Each time stocks rallied, they fell again. Each time the economy began to grow...along came another setback. This continued for the next 20 years...until March of this year...when Tokyo stocks hit their lowest point for the whole bear market. A generation of investors had been nearly wiped out. Over two generations they had made nothing. Trillions worth of wealth had been erased.

What did the Japanese authorities do during these last two decades? They fought the correction every step of the way, with the boldest attempt at fiscal and monetary stimulus every undertaken up to that point. Interest rates came down to effectively zero. And government spending soared, creating the largest deficits in Japanese history. Now, Japan's national debt approaches 200% of GDP - a peacetime record. If it continues to grow at this rate, it will hit 300% of GDP in just a few more years.

Sound familiar? It should. The key US interest rate is now effectively zero. The Fed says it will leave it there for "as long as it takes." And deficits have reached staggering levels - 13% of GDP. At this rate, the US debt/GDP ratio will hit 100% in just a few years. And if it continues, US debt/GDP will reach 200% not long after - as recession- reduced tax revenues meet stimulus-increased outlays.

But wait...the feds say they won't let it happen. They'll turn this thing around. The economy will begin to grow. Tax revenues will rise. Prices will go up.

Hey...that's just what the Japanese said!

So far, the US is doing almost exactly what the Japanese did...propping up zombie companies and stimulating the economy as best it can.

But if it does the same thing the Japanese did, won't the US get the same results the Japanese got?

Here is where it gets interesting. Because the US economy is not exactly like the Japanese economy. Japan had high savings...and a positive trade balance. It could run up huge government debts and "owe it to itself." It could finance its government debts with the savings of its own people, in other words. It never had to worry about foreigners refusing to buy its bonds...or selling them suddenly.

America's government debt is different. The US doesn't save enough to finance its own deficits. So it depends on the kindness of strangers. And if those strangers ever lose faith in America's ability or willingness to repay its debts, they'll drop the dollar like an annoying girlfriend. And when they do, the whole global monetary system will come crashing down.

But suppose savings rates go up in America - to, say, 10% of GDP, like they were before the bubble years. That would make $1.4 trillion of savings available to finance the feds' deficits. And suppose the slump continues...as we think it will, with another big scare in the investment markets. People will seek safety in...yes, you guessed it...US bonds. This will take the pressure off the dollar and permit the US to finance its countercyclical spending without depending heavily on foreigners. The recession/depression will be annoying...but not insufferable. And Bernanke will figure he has more to lose by undermining the dollar than to gain from it. In that case, the Japan- like slump could go on for many years - just as it has in Japan!

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Recession for the Japanese Economy Once Again
• Japan “Wasted Trillions” on Stimulus Programs
• Difference Between the Dollar and the Yen
• How Will the United States Finance the Biggest Deficit of All Time?
• U.S. Government Must Roll Over $3.4 Trillion in Debt Over Next Four Years

Then on Tuesday the market snapped up $25 billion in ten-year notes and yields fell. Sovereign debt? Big whoop! Whether it's the end of the year and investors feel safer in Treasuries, or some other reason, Tuesday's auction showed no signs of an impending "bond fire of the vanities." The bond bubble keeps getting bigger.

Today, though, the market gagged. In an effort to lock-in low rates for longer terms, the Treasury served up $16 billion in 30-year bonds. The market turned sour. Reuter's reports that demand for the 30-year was the weakest since May and that yields moved up as the weak auction triggered selling.

And then everyone seemed to lose their nerve. Stocks fell across the board. Gold set a new high at $1,123.40 in New York trading, before retreating. The weak 30-year auction has people thinking...what happens when Treasury supply overwhelms demand?

What will happen to bond prices then? To inflation? What should I do?

The rest of today's Daily Reckoning will be devoted to some constructive apocalysm. We may have left the impression yesterday that there was nothing but pain and heartache ahead for investors. But that doesn't have to be the case. But you have to start with the big picture. And that begins with the end of the bull market in bonds.

Check out the chart below from Ron Greiss at the www.thechartstore.com. Ron's chart shows long-term U.S. bond yields since 1941. Mostly this reflects the yield on 30-year bonds, although there were periods where 30-year issuance was discontinued. Either way, it shows a great cycle...which appears to be bottoming out.

What story does this chart tell? We reckon it shows you why the U.S. government (and so many banks and borrowers) are eager to sell as much debt now as possible. Rates are near historic lows. If and when they go up, it's going to make borrowing and servicing new debt even more expensive. Bond prices will fall and yields will rise again.

Now you could say that, according to the chart, there is room for another decade of low yields. The Fed, for example, could move to set rates further out on the yield-curve. It only sets rates right now for short-term debt. But the quantitative easing program has moved the Fed out to ten-year yields. It's done this to try and keep mortgage rates low, as mortgage-rates are keyed to U.S. ten-year yields.

But we reckon not even the Fed can keep yields low forever by supporting prices. It will have to wind down its programs eventually. For example, the U.S. government ran its largest October deficit ever last month, at $176 billion. Between demographics and existing debt, the Fed may not have the resources to support bond prices too.

Besides, you'd think markets would begin to tire of U.S. debt, given the lousy fiscal position of the American government. At least that's what we'd think. And if we were trading it, we'd look for put options on ETFs that track bond prices, or call options on ETFs that track bond yields. That would be the cheap trade.

The investment decision is to find assets that out run inflation as bond yields move up. Granted, this assumes there is going to be inflation, which is a whole other argument. But if you'll grant us the assumption, we'll continue with the strategy...of finding assets that beat inflation.

You don't have to look far. Gold...oil...iron ore...tangible assets are what you're after. Does this conflict a bit with our analysis yesterday that China's resource demand is more fragile than reported? Yes, it does. But it still pays to focus on those resources that will be in demand no matter how bad the global economy gets again. What do nation states really want to own? What can they not do without?

You know they can't do without oil. And you know more and more of them prefer to own at least some gold rather than rapidly devaluing foreign currencies. That leaves us where we began, buying oil and gold and selling U.S. sovereign debt. Production of the first two is hard to increase. Supply of the last one is growing.

"There is a strong case to be made that we are already at 'peak gold'," Barrick's Aaron Regent told London's The Daily Telegraph today. Regent was speaking at RBC's annual gold conference in London. "Production peaked around 2000 and it has been in decline ever since, and we forecast that decline to continue. It is increasingly difficult to find ore."

Gold exploration budgets are up. But with the exception of China, gold production from traditional stalwarts like South Africa and Australia has trended down. Alex Cowie at Diggers and Drillers recently wrote a report suggesting that the best Aussie gold stories are listed here in Australia but digging for gold in Africa, where they incur production costs in U.S. dollars and where there are more greenfield projects than recycled brownfield projects.

Frankly, we have no idea if gold production has peaked. Mine supply could grow this year for all we know. But finding and mining gold is not easy and it's not cheap. And even if the gold supply does grow, we'd take it to the bank that the global gold supply will not grow faster than global money supply.

And oil? Any scenario in which an economic collapse leads to falling GDP ought to mean lower demand for oil and lower oil prices. But the case for oil is not really about the demand side. You reckon that's bound to grow over time anyway, unless someone comes up with table top cold fusion. The real oil bull story is on the supply side.

Earlier this week the U.K.'s Guardian reported that, "The world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit, according to a whistleblower at the International Energy Agency who claims it has been deliberately underplaying a looming shortage for fear of triggering panic buying."

" 'The IEA in 2005 was predicting oil supplies could rise as high as 120m barrels a day by 2030 although it was forced to reduce this gradually to 116m and then 105m last year,' said the IEA source, who was unwilling to be identified for fear of reprisals inside the industry. 'The 120m figure always was nonsense but even today's number is much higher than can be justified and the IEA knows this.'"

We remember writing about the IEA figure a few years ago. And we remember pointing out that producing 120 million barrels of oil per day would be a 44% increase on producing 83 million barrels per day. And you'd have to find that oil first. You'd have to explore, drill, and produce it. And you'd have to maintain existing production levels at the world's big elephant fields like Cantarell and Ghawar.

In point of fact, production at Cantarell has fallen by 25% since 2004. Energy expert Matthew Simmons says Mexico's days as an oil exporter will end in 18 to 36 months. This makes Mexico's government-which derives 40% of its revenues from oil sales-the most likely candidate for "next failed state."

By the way, if you think illegal immigration is problem in America now (and it is), imagine what would happen if the finances of the Mexican state imploded with a production catastrophe at Cantarell. The Obama administration would face another crisis, but this one right on its massive southern border.

Not everyone believes in Peak Oil. But it's not really a matter of faith. Either oil production is declining or it is not. It does not mean there isn't any oil left. In fact, technology has lengthened the life of productive fields. And technology has also made it possible to find and produce oil in increasingly hostile environments (deep water drilling, the Arctic, etc.)

Even rank and file petroleum geologists are mostly in agreement (and sometimes in disagreement with their corporate overlords) that Peak Oil is real and it's here now. But we make this point not to say that all is lost. It isn't. It's just the great changes in the world are afoot.

You have a secular bond bull that's long in the tooth. The post-war monetary system that supported the expansion of the fiscal welfare state through perpetual debt is failing. Energy, which has been getting cheaper and cheaper for years as we found more and more of it, may start becoming more expensive and harder to find.

That's going to make the world a slightly less friendly place. But for investors, there are heaps of opportunities. For example, right now Alex is looking at what the fallout from next month's Copenhagen summit is. It has opened the door to a great entry point for energy investments, but not necessarily oil. Fear not! Or fear a little. But prepare.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Attack of the Bond Yields
• Central Bankers Encourage Debt Booms That Become Debt Bombs
• U.S. Bond Prices Rose and Yields Fell
• Higher Oil Prices, the New Normal
• Choking on Debt in the Unfolding Anglo-Saxon Bond Crisis

"Why don't you move back into your own house," his father wanted to know.

"Dad, I've got a good tenant in there. Besides, it's not in very good shape. I'd rather sell it than invest more money in it. And there are so many places on the market, I can rent something better. Even after a big drop in prices it is still cheaper to rent than it is to buy something."

There are probably millions of homeowners who would like to sell - if they could. This hidden inventory of unsold houses will depress housing prices for a long time.

But there's a crisis coming in commercial real estate too.

"An extreme amount of commercial debt is to mature over the coming years," writes real estate investor George Karahalios in Marc Faber's Gloom, Doom and Boom Report. "And unlike the residential market, there is no safety net (Fannie Mae) for commercial loans. Instead investors must rely on financing through commercial banks, a few insurance companies, and other private lenders who now demand much higher interest rates and more equity for the risk associated with these investments. Thus, not even the Fed's printing presses can save commercial property prices, and I am expecting certain locations to crash, perhaps falling as much as 50-80% from the peak."

So you see, dear reader, there is bad news ahead - a lot of it. Stocks will go down. Gold will go down too - most likely - when people realize that the economy faces a long, deflationary depression...not a period of inflationary growth.

But while stocks are fair weather friends, gold sticks by you in foul weather too. Right now, gold is rising on good news. Eventually, it will soar when the news turns bad. (Though...not necessarily right away...)

Until tomorrow,

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• The Housing Slump Has Fattened the Inventory of Unsold Homes
• Commercial Real Estate May Be the Next to Fall
• Trends Make Investors Less Afraid of Risk
• Ireland Going Through Same De-leveraging Process as the US
• Housing Prices Follow GDP Growth and Inflation