In part due to this shift, these economies - China, India, Brazil, etc. - command an increasingly important role in the geopolitical arena. In addition, these New Economies on the Block are forging important trade ties with each other and inking deals to secure their mutually beneficial future, ex-US.

The United States, meanwhile, is up to its ears in ever-mounting debt...both to its creditor nations in the Middle and Far East and, to an even larger extent, to its own citizens.

And so we ask ourselves, will the young Johnnie and Jenny Smiths of the West be able to bluff their way through the next round of negotiations with a pair of twos? Or will the Changs, Patels and Ahmeds of the world call their bluff and take them to the cleaners?

Unfortunately, the trouble started for Generation iPod before they even had a chance to cause it for themselves. "Like America itself," observes Bill Bonner, "[Young Americans] are in danger of finding themselves slipping downhill. Instead of expecting things to get better, they may find it hard even to hold onto what they've got. Instead of the 'Morning in America' that Ronald Reagan promised, they may find that it seems more like evening, both in their personal as well as their national lives."

Much of America's international influence was acquired during a time when the dollar roamed free and easy as the world's reserve currency. French President Charles De Gaulle called it an "extraordinary privilege."

At its height, the greenback commanded a magisterial awe and its position was largely considered unchallengeable. But no challenge is too great for the mighty US government...especially the challenge to debase its own currency.

It is true that extraordinary privileges carry extraordinary responsibilities. Within a single generation, the irresponsible goons in charge of preserving the dollar's integrity had destroyed almost all of its purchasing power. Measured against gold, it has slumped some 97% since Nixon closed the gold window in '71. And now, when the Treasury Secretary of the United States of America tells a classroom of Chinese university students that his nation's currency is trustworthy and reliable, they laugh in his face.

Then, on top of an increasingly worthless currency, Generation iPod also inherits about a quarter of a million dollars each in unfunded Social Security and healthcare obligations, the overdue infrastructure bills of a crumbling nation, a couple of distant wars to fight and die in and a world full of disgruntled foreign creditors.

Is there any hope?

Opined John Mauldin on the subject in Tuesday's issue: "It is not the times which dictate the man (or daughter!), but the response of the man which dictates his own time. Today has a brighter future for someone young than any other time in history, whether they are in the US or Brazil or China. They just have to seize it..."

Echoes Bill, "The real advantage in life is having the gumption to get on with it; no one knows where that comes from."

Indeed, history provides us with countless examples of individuals triumphing over adversity. A hard working American student has every chance to succeed in life, as does a hard working Asian student. It's just that, on the whole, graduating classes of Asian engineers and computer programmers are far more diligent than graduating classes of Western feminist film studies students.

Taiwanese university graduates, for example, would happily take on the workload of most western jobs as a vacation, never mind as a vocation. The forty-hour workweek (35 for our French readers) is something students here manage between classes...and cram sessions...and helping run the family business...and music lessons...and English school in the afternoons and evenings. Not only have the Asian countries already outworked the west over the past generation - by a measure significant enough to now own virtually all of the western countries' debts - but they continue to up the ante even now. They have raised the bar, in other words, and they are raising it still.

A generation ago, Mao Tse-Tung did his people a huge favor and finally died. His successor, Deng Xiaoping then told the Chinese masses not to fear wealth and that, in fact, to get rich was "glorious." It was a stark contrast to the self-immolating edicts spewed forth from Mao. The people rejoiced...and got to work. Last year, China created millionaires at the second fastest rate of any nation on the planet. Only India outpaced her. Meanwhile, America "demoted" millionaires quicker than any other country could manage. England was next on that dubious accolade.

The people in this region of the world are hungry...and they are only now beginning to taste the fruits of their labor. As finite resources - energy, food, land, water - stretch over the coming years to meet exponentially growing demand, Generation iPod needs at least to know what they are up against in the scramble to stake their claims.

And, not unlike the Eastern generations of yore, they must work hard to succeed, despite the impediments their government impose. This unfolding reversal of fortune between the West and East does not simply suggest that American college students might face a less inviting future than their parents faced. It also suggests that investors might find a more inviting future in the Emerging Markets than they will face in the Developed Markets.

Joel Bowman
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Getting the New iPod to Work
• HSBC Reveals Days of the Dollar are Numbered
• Dollar Up, Gold Down
• American Family’s Share of Government Debt Now Over Half a Million Dollars
• Invest in China’s Geeks and Guts

Interesting huh? Consumer credit has fallen off a cliff.

What does that mean exactly? It means Americans aren't borrowing...and they aren't buying either.

This weekend, The New York Times noticed:

"Americans stop buying; trade deficit declines" begins the headline.

This is the story we've been telling here at The Daily Reckoning for two years. Americans have to cut back. They are out of time and out of money. Ten years closer to retirement than they were in before the tech stock crash, Baby Boomers are not a penny richer. Now, they're facing a funky economy where housing prices are in decline, jobs are hard to find and lenders are reticent to lend them more money. Daddy has finally taken the T-bird away.

But wait...if the Baby Boomers stop spending won't it have, like, repercussions?

The NYT continues:

"For the first eight months of the year, the United States trade deficit with China is down by about 14 percent or $20 billion, compared with one year ago. The nation's trade deficit with Japan has shrunk by almost 20 percent, and its deficits with Mexico, Canada and the European Union are down more than 40 percent.

"The huge shift stems mainly from the staggering collapse in trade. With credit markets frozen and Americans facing the highest unemployment in more than 30 years, the United States suddenly stopped shopping overseas at anywhere near the volumes that had become normal."

Americans were the world's champion consumers. Just lend them money; they'd spend it. But when they stop spending it brings a hush to the entire planet. The malls go quiet...trucks slow down...ships are idled...and finally factories are shut down. Clerks, drivers, stevedores and assembly line workers all go home. That is what a depression is all about.

The feds are trying to get consumers to spend again. They've given them tax rebates, incentives, loans, and bribes. They've run a federal deficit three times higher than the previous record. They promise $1 trillion deficits "as far as the eye can see." And they put at risk a sum of money equal almost to the entire US GDP.

Still those hardheaded consumers won't consume like they're supposed to.

Suddenly, it's the 'Age of Thrift.'

But if it's really the age of thrift, the stock market doesn't seem to have gotten the message. The Dow rose 78 points on Friday, to a new post-crash high. Oil held at over $72. And gold lost $7 to close at $1,049.

What are stock market investors thinking? Are they thinking at all?

If the consumer credit party is over...and the Baby Boomers are on the wagon...is it really possible for US businesses to grow...and prosper?

Yes, it is. America has great businesses with great brands. As the dollar falls it should be able for them to gain global market share in some sectors. But 70% of the economy is consumer spending. Until that changes, the US economy is hostage to US consumer spending. When consumers stop consuming, the US economy's wheels stop turning.

Okay, so you're thinking: "Well...maybe Americans have to cut back, but there are plenty of other people in the world. Let them do the buying for a while!"

And you are right. America has less than 5% of the world's population. But it consumes more than 20% of the total world's output - as measured by GDP. Clearly, Americans have been doing more than their fair share. It's time to let the foreigners belly up to the bar. Heck, they're skinny. They could use a good drink.

In time, foreigners will spend more. We don't doubt it. But rebalancing the world's economies won't happen overnight. Nor even in a couple years. It will take a long, long time. And a lot of investment in new tools, new training, and new techniques. Until that happens, when US consumers stop buying it slows wheels all over the world.

Every time finance ministers and heads of state get together they talk about "rebalancing" the world economy. They promise to take steps to make it happen. But so far, the market is doing all the rebalancing work on its own.

And instead of letting nature take her course...allowing the invisible hand of capitalism to direct capital to where it is actually needed...the heavy hand of government blocks the process of correction.

Credit is still contracting. And Reuters reports that "small US firms face credit squeeze."

In theory, a genuine recovery in the United States could be led by exports. A cheaper dollar...and a cheaper workforce (in global terms)...would make the United States a better competitor.

But even a cheaper dollar is not guaranteed. Consumers may have stopped borrowing, but the US government borrows more than ever. This borrowing - in dollars - increases demand for greenbacks and may actually sustain the dollar at a higher level than it should be. The feds' appetite for borrowing could also force up interest rates - further restricting small businesses' access to easy credit.

There is a big difference between selling a few more Harley Davidsons overseas and real export-led economic growth for the US economy. The latter would require hundreds...thousands...of Harley Davidson enterprises, selling billions worth of goods and services to foreigners. And right now, those enterprises don't exist. They have no lobbyists trying to get TARP funds. They have no pet Congressmen slipping tax breaks for them into defense bills. They have no unions backing them. How could they; they haven't even gotten off the ground yet. And they may never get off the ground if they can't get financing.

The boomers are saving. They put their money into the safest possible place - US bonds! That is, they lend it to the government. They're the feds' biggest single source of financing - even bigger than the Chinese.

Meanwhile, the feds pump billions into the banking system. They supply the banks with capital for expansion and consumption. But instead of making loans to the private sector, the banks take the feds' money and lend it right back to them. They can borrow at a negligible rate...and then use the money to buy long-dated T-bonds yielding over 4%. Result: banks make money; the private sector has no money to create new businesses.

This weekend, we had a conversation with an English carpenter.

"It's rough. I remember just a couple of years ago, I could get work anywhere. Now it's off and on. I still find work, but I have a lot of free time too.

"It's not easy. Not with four children. We don't have any choice. We don't get any public benefits, you know...because I'm working. But I'm not working as much as I used to. And I'm not getting paid as much. So what can we do? We have to tighten our belts. We get by. But we're definitely not spending money they way we used to. In fact, I wish we hadn't spent so much back then. I'd like to have some of that money now."

A report in the Telegraph predicts British property prices - which have been in an upward trend for several months - are headed down again...with a 17% decline expected.

Until tomorrow,

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Is Gold at $1000 a Bargain…Or a Trap?
• Until This Debt is Reduced, Americans Will Be Reluctant to Borrow or Spend
• Baby Boomers Face Early Retirement With No Money Saved
• Americans Have No Money to Spend Because They Already Spent It!
• The Country is Going into a Recession with its Finances in the Worst Shape Ever

Yesterday, it touched a new record - $1,050 - even as the dollar rose, oil slumped under $70 and stocks dipped very slightly.

Well, what do you expect? The United States added $1 trillion to its monetary base in the last year or so. The federal government is running a deficit of $1.7 trillion this year. And along comes Barack Obama with an idea to stimulate employment - spend more money! This time, Obama's plan is a kind of 'Cash for Workers' program...in which businesses get a tax credit for hiring new employees.

Gold investors must think the new program will be the straw they've been waiting for. Government has piled on bales of costly new initiatives on this poor camel's back. Still, he stands up straight.

So, is gold at $1000 a bargain...or a trap? Or both.

We begin by asking: where's the inflation? We don't see any inflation. What we do see is deflation.

Barclays Capital says gold could go to $1,500. We don't know where they got that number. It could go to $15,000 for all we know. Or it could go down, too.

Our guess is that it will go down enough scare the bejesus out of speculators. Then, it will soar.

But, hey, we're just guessing - along with everyone else.

Sooner or later gold is probably headed to the lunatic moon. We're sticking with the yellow metal. We don't want to miss that ride.

But when?

Ah...we're going to stick our necks out and say "eventually." We're sure we're right about this. Just don't ask us for more precision; we have none. And what bothers us is that between eventually and now there could be a lot of time and a lot of trouble. And one trouble that could come up pretty fast is another crash in the stock market.

If the stock markets of the world take another dive...like they did last year...gold will probably go down with them. Not as much, but down nonetheless. So, if we were speculating...we'd probably be short gold and short stocks too. We'd bet against bonds too - even though we think they will probably go up in the short run. The smart, long term money - in both stocks and bonds - is probably on the short side.

Here at The Daily Reckoning, however, we never speculate - except in print. As to ideas about how the world works we have plenty. We speculate daily. As to gold, stocks and commodities, we prefer to hold onto our long-term positions.

What seems fairly sure to us is that this recovery is a fraud. It's a mountebank and a flimflam.

And now approaches a moment of truth - earnings announcements. Stock market investors bid up shares on the theory that sales and profits would rise. Will they? We don't think so.

We think sales are going to be disappointing...and earnings will be even worse. If so, we'll see analysts begin to change their expectations...and announce that the results are "not as bad as expected."

If we get a few really bad announcements - with results much worse than expected - it could sink the rally. Then again, if we're surprised with exceptionally good reports...it could send the market in the other direction.

Good results will also cause us here at The Daily Reckoning to question our position. Maybe the economy is not sinking into a chronic depression, after all. Could we be wrong?

Ha ha...are you kidding, dear reader? Of course, we can be wrong. When we were younger we were uncertain about things. But now that we're older, we're not so sure.

Here is what we're pretty sure about:

1) The credit cycle has topped out.

Americans are saving - think of the poor boomers, 10 years older but not a penny richer than they were in 1999. Stocks have gone nowhere but down in real terms. Houses hit a high in 2006...now, they're off 30%...and still going down. Jobs? Forget it...there are already 15 million people who are unemployed and about 200,000 more every month. The job market is unlikely to recover for another 6-13 years - that is, after many of the boomers are retired! And if you are lucky enough to have a job, you're not likely to get a raise...not with so much spare capacity in the labor market.

Under those conditions, a consumer boom is very unlikely.

2) We know that a period of credit contraction is deflationary.

Prices go down as demand falls. Buyers disappear from the malls that once knew them, while the factories that produce stuff grow dusty and quiet.

But we know the feds hate falling prices. And we know they are taking extraordinary actions to get prices to go up. So far, their efforts have been a giant flop. Prices are falling in the United States at the fastest pace since the '50s.

Most of the feds' efforts have been directed towards keeping the bankers fat and happy...and getting themselves a bigger share of America's output. They took funds designed to relaunch the US economy, for example, and used them to buy themselves a big position in the auto industry, the financial industry and the insurance industry.

3) We know too, by the way they conducted themselves in those affairs, that the feds have become much more aggressive...throwing their weight around in the private sector as never before.

What we don't know is how this affects markets in the short term. So far, consumer prices are falling, but the stock market is enjoying a bounce. It is a real, new bull market? Or just a bear market bounce? It is probably a bear market bounce...but it has been going for long enough that we have to at least consider the idea that it is a genuine bull market. That's why the numbers from this quarter are important...they'll tell us if the companies themselves are expanding earnings fast enough to justify investors' optimism.

4) We know too that there is a whole lot of 'flation going on.

We are just unable to tell you what kind of 'flation it is. The monetary base is way up - it increased by $1 trillion in the last 12 months. But the money-in-circulation has barely budged. The feds give the banks overnight loans at practically zero interest. Then, the banks lend it back to the feds at nearly 4% more.

What happens to it then? Well, what do you think...it is wasted on typical federal government scams and humbugs.

So, relatively little of the money actually ends up in the consumer economy. And so, we can't tell you whether the 'flation will have a 'in' prefix or a 'de' prefix. They're just two letters. But they will make a whole alphabet of difference to the economy and to your investments.

5) Most important, we are dead sure that the people running America's financial policies are jackasses.

We say that with all due respect, which is probably not much. They have only one idea - and it is a bad one. They think economies are improved by more consumer spending. They don't seem to care why consumers occasionally cut back on their spending. All that matters to them is finding ways to get the consumer shopping again. So they try tax cuts and government spending...bailouts and boondoggles...zero interest lending and federal takeovers...cash for clunkers, cash for houses, cash for employees....

..trillions worth of claptrap and folderol. But what a nuisance! The fool consumer still won't shop!

But they're determined to keep trying. That's why we can be pretty sure that, eventually, they'll get inflation rates up. One way or another. And then, gold at $1000 will seem like an outrageous bargain.

Until next time,

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Is Gold Going Up Because People Fear Inflation?
• Gold is More Like a Religion or a Political Position
• Feds’ Plan is to Reflate the Economy
• Markets Rise While the Economy Sinks
• The Economy is Getting Worse Not Better

Indeed, Prime Minister Winston Churchill who had led his nation into an impressive military victory in World War II, confident that the defeat of Nazi Germany would help save the British Empire, failed to recognize that the enormous military and economic costs of the war had actually created the conditions for the liquidation of the empire, starting with the withdrawal from Palestine and the "loss" of India after the war.

But while the sun was setting on the British Empire, members of its political elite continued to live under the illusion that their nation had remained a paramount global power. If you traveled in a time machine to London 1949 and attended a debate in the British Parliament, browsed through the pages of the Times or listened to a BBC news program you would come across numerous references to Britain as a Great or "superpower,"; a term that was applied to the United States and the Soviet Union after World War II. And if you encountered diplomats in His and (after 1953) Her Majesty's Diplomatic Service and bankers in the City of London, you wouldn't be surprised if they continued to behave as though the world was still their domain to rule.

It was the humiliating abandonment of the Anglo-French invasion of Suez in collusion with Israel in 1956 that proved to be the turning point in Britain's retreat from empire and ensured that London would never again attempt global military action without first securing the acquiescence of Washington. The time lag between the effective end of the British Empire and the recognition that indeed it was all over, proved to be quite lengthy.

The concept of "recognition lag" is familiar to economists. It refers to the time lag between when an actual economic shock, such as a sudden boom or bust, occurs and when it is recognized by economists, central bankers and the government, like when officials signal a recession in the economy several months after it has actually begun.

And just like changes in economic conditions, changes in the global status and power of nations, are not always immediately apparent, especially to the politicians and the generals who yield that power and to the journalists who cover them. That the elites continue to share such misconceptions about their nation's ability to exert global influence has less to do with the power of inertia and more with the vested interests they have in maintaining the status-quo that could be threatened by challenges at home and abroad.

While no one is comparing the global political, economic and military status of the United States to that of Great Britain after World War II, there is an eerie resemblance between the resistance of officials, lawmakers and pundits in London 1949 and that of their contemporary counterparts in Washington 2009 to adjust their nation's foreign policies to the changing global balance of power. That may explain why so many members of the US foreign policy establishment seem to be so depressed in face of the Obama Administration's current difficulties in dictating global developments, ranging from the military quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran's nuclear aspirations and the deadlocked Israel/Palestine peace process to the stalled negotiations on global trade liberalization (the Doha Round), the efforts to reach an international agreement on climate change and the global financial imbalances between the US and China. Where is US leadership on this or that global policy issue? Why can't the Obama Administration "do something" to resolve this or that international crisis?

As expected, neoconservative critics depict President Barack Obama as an idealistic peacenik, if not a 1930's-style appeaser. They blame the perceived erosion in US' ability to call the shots around the world on Obama's alleged failure to stand-up to Russia (by abandoning the missile shield program in Eastern Europe), to Iran (by trying to engage it), to Venezuela (by shaking hands with Hugo Chavez) and to Al Qaeda (by overturning torture practices), and on his supposed betrayal of allies (Israel, Georgia, Poland, the Czech Republic). Not to mention Obama's refusal to launch new crusades against Islamofascism, to promote the Freedom Agenda in the Greater Middle East and to annoy the commies in Beijing on a regular basis.

That's rich coming from the guys at the Weekly Standard and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). After all, it was the mess that the Bush administration, guided by these neoconservatives, had made in the Greater Middle East - where US military power was overstretched to the maximum, and where American policies helped strengthen Iran and its surrogates in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine - coupled with the dramatic loss of American financial resources, that has produced a long-term transformation in the balance of power in the Middle East and worldwide, and has significantly eroded Washington's geo-strategic and geo-economic clout. In fact, the increasing wariness of the American public regarding new US military interventions, as a consequence of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the expanding US deficits would have made it difficult even for a President John McCain to promote an aggressive US policy in the Middle East and elsewhere.

That Obama finds it so difficult to press Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai to change their policies may have to do with the fact that unlike many of the elites in Washington, the above and other foreign leaders have succeeded in deconstructing the current geo-strategic reality and recognized that the global balance of power has been shifting and that US ability to exert its diplomatic and military leverage over them has been constrained. Let's hope that these changes will also be recognized in Washington as soon as possible, and that unlike the leaders of the British Empire, those in charge of Pax Americana will have enough time to readjust to the new global reality.

Regards,

Leon T. Hadar
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Global Warming and the Children of Israel
• America’s Decline as a Great Empire
• Barack Obama is a Strong Favourite to Win the Presidency
• 1 Out of 10 American Mortgages Are Owned by Other Countries
• The Crime of Central Banking

The S&P 500 is up almost 60% since March. The Dow just had its best quarter since '98.

Yesterday, the Dow slipped 29 points. Is the rally finally rolling over? Or is this a genuine bull market, just taking a pause?

If it is a real bull market, then it's a funny looking bull - one that's missing parts!

For example, corporate earnings are missing. P/E ratios are rising far above the corporate earnings that support them. This puts the market 35% overvalued, on a cyclically adjusted P/E basis, says Smithers & Co. And if you look at it in terms of its "q" ratio - a comparison of capitalization to replacement costs - the S&P is even more overvalued. As for emerging markets - "they're off the charts," says The Financial Times.

Another missing part is the consumer. This from David Rosenberg:

"Consumer confidence not only surprised to the downside in September but the Conference Board index actually fell to 53.1 from 54.5 with both the 'present situation' and the 'expectations' component failing to build on the August rebound. Before we go any further on the details, let's recall the following:

• Historically, by the time the S&P 500 rebounds 60% from the trough, the confidence index is sitting at 92.0;
• The month recession ends, the index is, on both an average and median basis, sitting at 72.0;
• During an economic expansion, the consumer confidence averages 102.0; in a recession, it averages 72.4.

"Just to put a 53.0 reading into proper perspective. It's still recessionary... The only categories [that] actually saw their confidence level rise in September were the ones in the lowest income strata - less than $25,000 (their confidence rose two points). After all, they're the only ones really benefiting from all the government intervention into the economy and the markets."

It's not hard to figure out why consumers lack confidence; this bull is lacking in jobs, too. A worse-than-forecast report came in from ADP Employer Services yesterday. It said US companies cut 254,000 more jobs in September. And Reuters reports that jobless rate rose in August in all US cities.

The bull is also missing production. Another report told us that manufacturing activity in the Chicago area is still in recession. In the United States as a whole, the latest numbers tell us that GDP fell in the 2nd quarter - but by less than forecast. "Less than forecast" might be good news if stocks were at an epic low. Instead, at current levels, it is much like a doctor who tells the family: "Thank God he got medical attention. He's dead, but not as dead as he would have been without it."

Another important part this bull market is missing is the retail stock market investor. Hey, this rally has no legs at all!

We have insisted - with no proof, up until now - that the mom and pop investor is no longer counting on the stock market for his retirement. He's seen what can happen. At the low in March, adjusted for inflation, he was back to where he was 40 years ago. That is, in real terms, he had not made a dime from the stock market (aside from dividends) during his entire adult lifetime.

We guessed that he was not buying stocks.

Now, here's the evidence: according to TrimTabs, only $2.5 billion has gone into equity mutual funds in the last six months. Bond funds have attracted 13 times as much money as equity funds, says a Morningstar report.

"US retail investors...have watched this rally from the sidelines," the FT concludes.

Wait a minute. Someone is pushing up stock prices. If not the retail trade, who? We don't know. Maybe hedge funds. Maybe institutional speculators. The pros have a different outlook. If this rally turns out to be real, and they miss it, their jobs and reputations are in danger. If it turns out to be phony, on the other hand, they risk clients' money. On balance...they are better off getting in than staying out.

But just as the pros jump like lemmings into equities...they could all scramble out fast. Give them a fright...and this rally is over.

Where might the fright come from? We can think of several possibilities. One is the housing sector. If foreclosures begin to increase...and prices fall...even the pros may put two and two together.

Likewise, a shocking unemployment number could cause them to connect the dots.

Then, look out below...

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• A Bull Market in Gold and Gold Alone
• How Much Worse Can the Stock Market Get? A Lot Worse
• The Pound is in Trouble
• September is the Worst Month for the Stock Market
• In a Bear Market Most Stocks Go Down, So What Do You Do?

The team at Casey's Energy Opportunities believe that planned government buying or selling of crude oil for SPRs actually have very little impact in the overall market. However, an overall drawdown of worldwide inventory could put downward pressure on the price of oil. The various countries also have their particular reasons and influences in decisions to tap their reserves.

So which countries are executing preparedness plans to fill their strategic reserves with $70 oil now (as opposed to $140+)? Below are the 10 countries that consume the most oil in the world, as of 2008, the latest figures available from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy:

Russia, Canada, and Saudi Arabia can leave the list, as they are net exporters of oil and thus do not actually require a strategic reserve, at least in the short term. We'll also bump Brazil, because its balance of imports is dwindling every year, and it should become a exporter before it requires a reserve. That leaves six countries to examine:

The United States

Not surprisingly, America has the largest strategic reserve in the world in an absolute sense. Its 727 million barrels are stored in four hollowed-out salt domes (and one pending) along the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico. These add up to some 62 days' worth of imports, according to government sources. The United States government currently has plans to push this to 1 billion barrels, or about 85 days' worth of imports, which would make the reserves equivalent to those of Japan and Korea.

The SPR build-up will be accomplished by expanding two of the current facilities, for an additional 113 million barrels, and (probably) building a new one in Richton, Missouri, for 160 million barrels. The Richton project has met local opposition, because it would require pumping 50 million gallons of freshwater per day from the Pascagoula River to dissolve enough salt to open up another subterranean cavern. The total cost of the program is estimated at US$3.7 billion, not including the cost to fill the reserves. Oil purchases are likely to be slow, at around 100,000 bpd (barrels per day) before 2014 and 150,000 bpd thereafter.

In a real emergency, the combined American strategic and commercial reserves (the latter held by private corporations, especially refiners) may seem unnervingly thin from the perspective of energy security. Add to that the fact that the government can release them at a rate of only 4.4 million barrels per day, or about half its imports.

Still, the 108 or so days' reserve it has between government and commercial sources are considered adequate by international standards. The United States has used this reserve twice in the past 20 years (Desert Storm and Hurricane Katrina) to combat severe demand or supply disruptions. It also has the luxury of importing more oil from Canada in an emergency.

Scenarios that could force a sustained drawdown of reserves:

• Sustained hyperinflation in the United States due to actions by the Federal Reserve that causes oil-producing countries to look for better markets to sell oil.
• A prolonged general embargo by OPEC on the United States, forcing America to look to traditional partners such as Canada and Mexico, though they might not have sufficient oil.
• Another war, potentially in North Korea or Iran, requiring a large amount of oil input from America that it simply does not have.
• A particularly active hurricane season that knocks out a large amount of production capacity in the Gulf of Mexico, and the United States releases from the SPR to help.

China

China's strategic reserves began being built in 2004, when leaders in China began to realize that the country had no adequate government- controlled reserves to combat any disruptions in the supply of oil. China is a large importer and is dependent on the same sources of foreign oil as the United States. China is even more anxious to build such a reserve, as two of its neighbors, Korea and Japan, both have large strategic reserves.

China currently has four government reserves with a total reserve potential of 272 million barrels, which translates to about 30 days' consumption. Two of the four have been confirmed full, and there are rumors that all four are and that China has taken advantage of the recent precipitous drop in the price of oil to buy up. According to Chinese government sources, however, the reserves are likely not to be completely full until 2010, and 2009 buying of oil will be at around 42 million barrels.

The government has also announced plans to increase the country's reserve from 30 to 100 days of consumption. The next stage of the development will call for an additional 170 million barrels in eight storage facilities. The locations of the facilities are as yet secret.

In an emergency, China would likely turn to Russia to buy oil, though only the naive would be surprised if Russia added a premium for the privilege.

Scenarios that could force a sustained drawdown of reserves in China:

• Worldwide embargo on China due to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
• High oil prices force Chinese industries out of business, pressuring the government to keep oil prices low domestically by selling some of the reserves to domestic companies.
• North Korea asks for oil from China to support military action on the Korean Peninsula, and China ships it to them on the black market.
• Russia slows or stops its exports as part of the Russian "dominance via energy" strategy, leaving Chinese pipelines trickling and Chinese industries disrupted.

Japan/South Korea

We have placed Japan and South Korea's reserves together, as the two countries have a treaty that allows them to share their strategic reserves.

Resource-poor Japan has one of the world's largest strategic oil reserves, enough for 82 days of imports. State-controlled reserves are run by the state-owned Japan Oil, Gas, and Metals National Corporation. The reserves consist of 320 million barrels in 10 different locations, which makes them second only to the United States in absolute volume. Japan's island geography means that having an emergency supply of crude oil is crucial, and the Japanese government obviously has not ignored this aspect.

South Korea is in one of the global "hotspots" in the world, right beside North Korea. As the country is under an almost constant threat of war, the government has stocked up some 76 million barrels, with capacity for an additional 40 million barrels.

Scenarios that could force a drawdown of reserves:

• Just one at this time, from two possible sources: political instability in the region caused by either the Taiwan or the Korea conundrums disrupts tanker transport, perhaps even forces them to port.

India

India has a small reserve it began to build in 2004. This stockpile is sufficient for perhaps only two weeks of consumption. The country eventually wants to raise this level to 45 days, though the first phase has not even been completed yet. The projects are estimated to come online in 2012, which means it has taken eight years from planning to completion. These figures imply that India will not even have a somewhat sufficient strategic reserve until 2016, given that the expansion project was approved in 2008.

Germany

Germany has the largest reserve in Europe and is among the top in the world as well. Its government has satisfied a federal law that regulates storage be at least 90 days' worth of net imports. More than half of the storage is in Southern Germany, where large salt caverns exist. Germany is well prepared in its strategic oil reserves, and there are no glaring factors that would force a drawdown of reserves, barring a global catastrophe. Furthermore, the reserves of Germany, France, and Italy are pooled and can be used by any of the three countries in an emergency.

So How Much Do the Reserves Matter?

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates, some 2 billion barrels are held in government-owned strategic reserves around the world. Though this seems like plenty of oil, does it really impact the spot price of oil? Collectively, the answer is yes, as this volume corresponds to 23 days' worth of global consumption. If drawn down together over a short period of time, the effect on spot price could be substantial.

For illustration's sake, suppose that countries collectively draw down their entire reserves over the period of a year. This rate would make up for 10% of the daily worldwide trade of crude oil, which could certainly impact price (imagine ConocoPhillips and ExxonMobil both going under at the same time).

Individually, however, even China and the United States have a limited impact on the spot price of oil over a single year. If the United States' inventory were drawn over an entire year, it would only make for a 4% increase in supply. Under normal buying patterns of each country's strategic reserves, the impact is even smaller. Since China's 42-million-barrel purchase is over one year, their purchase would not even make a dent in the daily trade of oil.

Thus, a concerted effort by the worldwide reserves can definitely keep prices down in the short term (within a year, two at best), but cannot make for a paradigm shift in the supply/demand model of oil or the Peak Oil argument. And from the buying side, if governments plan the filling of their strategic reserves, the impact on the spot price of oil is likely to be minimal.

Perception is a tricky horse to ride, however, as we all know. Given a worldwide panic for oil à la the 1973 oil embargo, oil prices could spike in the short term, because government reserves would likely raise purchases 10% or so in a real emergency. This effect would be short lived for the foreseeable future, though, as worldwide reserves are already reaching their limits.

In short, if everything goes according to "plan" by the governments, even filling a large reserve such as the Chinese SPR would have little impact on the price of oil. For SPRs to truly impact the spot price of oil, it would have to be a global situation, with war and embargo the two most likely scenarios. Even then, the impact would be mellowed by limitations on how quickly governments can either release or purchase the oil.

Regards,

Marin Katusa
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• How to Buy Crude Oil for US$2 a Barrel
• The War for Oil Reserves
• OPEC Agrees Not to Cut Oil Production Until it Meets in May
• Oil Prices Has The Mogambo Guru Sticking His Thumb in His Eye
• Pemex and Mexican Peak Oil Equal Expensive Oil

"We may now be entering the Asian century, dominated by a rising China and its currency. This decline of the dollar might take more than a decade, but it could happen even sooner if we do not get our financial house in order. The United States must rein in spending and borrowing, and pursue growth that is not based on asset and credit bubbles. For the last two decades America has been spending more than its income, increasing its foreign liabilities and amassing debts that have become unsustainable."

Yes, it could take more than a decade. But investors could take a big loss any day. All it would take would be a sudden move by China...or a shocking inflation figure in the United States...or a Treasury bond auction that doesn't go as planned. Everyone is watching the United States...carefully. And foreigners hold trillions' worth of dollar- based assets outside the United States. These are dollars that people hold, not to pay their bills or buy gasoline, but as a speculation. They're speculating the greenback will hold its value as well or better than the other things they might do with their money.

Europeans hedge their bets against the euro - with dollars. Asians hedge their bets against falling stock prices. Russians hedge their bets against the ruble. Latin Americans hedge their bets against their own pesos, bolivars, and cordobas. Everybody likes dollars because they are the most trusted money in the world. For the last 50 years, nothing could compete with the dollar. (Even though the dollar lost value against a number of other currencies over long periods of time.)

These foreign holders are already nervous. They've seen the mess the United States has gotten itself into. They read the headlines. They watch the news. They know that the United States is running a budget deficit this year equal to four times the biggest budget deficit ever - a record set just last year. It is as if a runner broke the record in the 100-yard dash...and then ran the course four times faster a year later. This is not progress. This is spooky.

The Chinese already let the United States know they are worried.

"We trust you to protect the value of our assets," they in essence said to the US Treasury Secretary.

And in the middle of May 2009, from the Financial Times comes news that Brazil and China are working toward using their own currencies in trade transactions rather than the US dollar.

This comes on the heels of the news that China's central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan proposed to create a reserve currency "that is disconnected from individual nations."

What Mr. Zhou would like is to replace the US dollar as the world's leading currency with a new international reserve currency, possibly in the form of special drawing rights (SDRs), a unit of account used by the International Monetary Fund.

Then in June, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev questioned the US dollar's future as a global reserve currency and said using a mix of regional currencies would make the world economy more stable. Russia may consider ruble-yuan swaps.

The dollar "is not in a spectacular position, let's be frank, and its prospects cause various questions as do the prospects for the global currency system, " Medvedev said in an interview published by the Moscow-based Kommersant newspaper. Regarding the global financial system, "therefore our task is to make it more mobile and at the same time more balanced."

But for now, as long as these countries trust the United States to keep its promises and protect its money, they continue to hold US dollar investments - notably, US Treasury bonds. But just wait until the United States loses their trust. In a matter of minutes, China could dump enough US dollars to set off alarms all over the world. All of a sudden, dollar holders would rush for the exits - each one trying to get out before the others. In minutes, the dollar market could collapse...taking down US Treasury bonds with it.

Regards,

Bill Bonner and Addison Wiggin
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• The Greenback Dollar Decline
• US Dollar As Reserve Currency Not Working Very Well
• US Dollar a Sort of Monetary Brand
• 4 Ways to Protect Against a Falling Dollar
• Special Drawing Rights Used as the World’s Reserve Currency?

What was America's Golden Age?

It is much too soon to write the history of America's decline and fall. Still, that doesn't stop us from guessing.

We would name the period between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of Lehman Bros - a period of only 19 years - as the peak of US power and wealth. Of course, Americans were dreaming during those years. The dreams were the usual imperial sort - that the US Empire was such a benefit to the rest of the world that the foreigners would support it indefinitely. Rome didn't take any chances; it forced its conquered nations to render tribute...slaves...gold...and wheat. The American empire depended on trade...and the dollar. As long as the United States had a commercial advantage, the empire was profitable. But as the 20th century aged, so did the US economy. Its competitors - notably Germany and Japan - had a big advantage. They had been bombed out in the '40s. They could build anew. America's trade advantage slipped away...and then its trade balance went negative in the mid- '80s. It has been getting more negative almost every year.

The trade losses shrank after the fall of the House of Lehman. Americans cut back. But today we get news that the trade deficit has just grown more than in any month in the last 10 years. Have Americans suddenly become big spenders again? Probably not. But we'll have to wait for another explanation; we don't have one.

No account of America's glory years - roughly the period between the reign of George Bush I and that of his son, George Bush II - would be complete without mention of the events that happened on this day eight years ago. A small group of terrorists pulled off an amazing coup - bringing down two of America's iconic buildings, right in the heart of New York City...and on primetime TV! Historians might be tempted to use this event as a milestone, marking the end of the period of maximum happiness in the United States of America. We caution against it. It was only later that it became apparent that the US reaction to the terrorist incident was suicidal. The nation desperately needed to bring its ambitions back in line with its means. It needed to save and invest in new factories and new infrastructure. Instead, it wasted trillions fighting phantoms and nobodies. But as far as anyone knew, US influence, prestige and power remained near its zenith throughout the wars on terror and Iraq.

The fall of Lehman changed things. Then it was obvious that not only was America vulnerable, she was an enemy to herself. She had diddle- daddled during the glory years, dawdling with the lion cubs that would grow up and maul her. Now, in the period we are living through, she attempts to go back to sleep and rerun her balmy dreams. That is what "recovery" is all about - a return to the land of nod and nonsense...in which people think they can actually become wealthier by squandering money they don't have on things they don't need.

Fortunately, as near as we can tell, most private citizens are now awake. A report at the beginning of this week showed that they repaid debt at a rate four times faster than economists projected. Savings rates are rising. Spending is falling. People are doing what they should do - they're cutting back.

But the feds continue their efforts to sabotage the correction and destroy the empire. They have already blown-up the budget - with $9 trillion in deficits expected over the next 10 years. Now, they're working on the dollar.

Yesterday, the dollar fell to $1.45 per euro. Gold remained just below the $1,000 an ounce mark. And the Dow rose 80 points.

Stock market investors seem to be looking forward to another big bull market. But with the economy deteriorating, they are probably just dreaming, too. Median household income fell 3.6% over the last 12 months. Of course, that's just what you'd expect in a correction. But it's not what the feds were hoping for. So, they're pulling out all the stops to try to turn it around. Most important, they're pulling out the stop that keeps the dollar from rolling down the hill.

But the dollar will eventually come tumbling down...and those who are holding gold are going to be sitting pretty. Gold is, after all, the ultimate store of wealth.

The empire sinks into the mud. Yes, this is the downhill period...the slide into corruption...the period in which Juvenal complained that Romans were only interested in 'bread and circuses.'

When you are on the board of a decent corporation, for example, if you have a direct financial interest in a matter under consideration you're expected to 'declare an interest' and absent yourself from the vote. But in a mature democracy, the most self-interested citizens are those most likely to vote. Currently, about 20 million people work for government. About 45 million receive Social Security benefits. About 34 million depend on food stamps.

(People who count on the government to feed them, warned Jefferson, "will soon want bread." That doesn't seem to worry many people. But at least the state of Maryland has an Orwellian sense of humor about it. People who depend on government for food are given "Independence" cards.)

That's 99 million people who have a direct interest in expanding government outlays...with some overlap, of course. And it doesn't mean that every person receiving a Social Security check is going to back the feds. But it doesn't count all the millions more who get subsidies, bailouts, welfare payments (often masquerading as tax credits), government contracts, and so forth, either.

Well, how many people does it take to win a national election? Obama won with 63 million votes.

The dollar's weakness hasn't been missed by it biggest foreign holder - China.

Reported earlier this week in the Telegraph:

"'We hope there will be a change in monetary policy as soon as they have positive growth again,' said Cheng Siwei...talking about America.

"'If they keep printing money to buy bonds it will lead to inflation, and after a year or two the dollar will fall hard. Most of our foreign reserves are in US bonds and this is very difficult to change, so we will diversify incremental reserves into euros, yen, and other currencies,' he said.

"China's reserves are more than - $2 trillion, the world's largest.

"Mr. Siwei continued: 'Gold is definitely an alternative, but when we buy, the price goes up. We have to do it carefully so as not to stimulate the markets,' he added."

Then, two days ago, in came a report that China is going to issue bonds of its own - in yuan.

This news is a shot across the bow of America's imperial currency. It signals that China is moving into position to eventually challenge the greenback. Investors will have another alternative to the dollar...another bond issued by another government and backed by another economy...maybe one that is on the way up, rather than on the way down.

Meanwhile, Americans grow poorer. Bloomberg reports:

"'The decline in incomes we're seeing certainly has implications for consumer spending, particularly post-housing bubble when families can't tap into home equity through loans,' said Heather Boushey, a senior economist at the Center for American Progress, a research organization headed by John Podesta, a leader of the Obama administration transition team.

"The poverty rate is likely to keep rising through 2012, even after the recession ends, adding to pressure on the Obama administration to enact a second economic stimulus package, said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, a policy research group.

"'We will likely have not only a jobless recovery but also a poverty- ridden recovery,' Sawhill said. 'The stimulus money is going to go away long before the poverty rate peaks.'"

How can a consumer economy grow when its consumers are becoming poorer? We take up that question below...

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• America’s Decline as a Great Empire
• Economy Has to Grow at 1% to Stay Even With Population Growth
• The Rise in the Dollar Doesn’t Have Everyone Convinced
• Difference Between the Dollar and the Yen
• A Recovery of Some Kind in Global Trade

Probably most incredible is that the dollar has NOT collapsed. It has lost ground, and was trading at $1.43 per euro on Friday, but no one laughs at you when go to exchange dollars...or offer to pay in dollars rather than the local currency.

For the last 10 years, the money supply in the United States has expanded at roughly twice the rate of GDP growth. And the Fed doubled its balance sheet in just the last 18 months. This last bit of information is stunning. It took the central bank nearly 100 years to build a balance sheet of $1 trillion. Then, under the leadership of Ben Bernanke, it added another $1 trillion in just a few months.

What does that mean, exactly? It means they bought a lot of debt from US agencies and the financial sector. It means also that they "monetized" this debt...transforming it into cash by paying for it with money especially created for that purpose. It also means that the whole financial sector has a bigger financial base against which to lend. The Fed lends against its balance sheet to member banks. These banks then lend to other banks who lend to business and consumers. So the amount of potential credit - as well as the amount of actual cash - has gone up.

There is an iron law in economics. Quality and quantity vary inversely...which is another way of saying that when you add more of something...each unit is worth less than the unit that preceded it (assuming everything else remained unchanged.) Certainly, this is true of money. The more money in a financial system, the less each unit of it is worth. Add enough new money - as Zimbabwe proved recently - and each unit becomes worthless.

But so far, the dollar has not collapsed. It has fallen, but gently...

Meanwhile, the inflation rate has NOT gone up. Instead, it's gone down. Go figure. You add that much monetary inflation and you'd expect to get a boost in the CPI. Nope. Not yet.

On the other hand, we're already a year-and-a-half into a major recession/depression. You'd think you'd get deflation. That hasn't happened either. Prices are down. But not as much as you'd expect, given the scale of the downturn.

Related to both the dollar and inflation is the bond market. Even more surprising is that the bond market has NOT fallen apart. Let's see, a huge input of monetary inflation; that ought to kill the bond market. Then too, the biggest sales of Treasury bonds in history - needed to cover a $1.7 trillion deficit this year. That ought to kill the bond market too. And on top of it all is a projection from the White House telling us that the feds will add $9 trillion to US debt over the next 10 years. And that assumes a full recovery in the economy! Now, that ought to kill the bond market for sure.

Not at all! Bond yields have risen...but the 10-year T-note still only gives you 3.4%.

Of course, you say, it's a depression. Bond yields always go down in a depression.

But if it's a depression, how come commodities are up? And stocks are up? Above all, how come Chinese stocks are up? Everybody knows China earns its money selling products to Americans and other non-Chinese. If the rest of the world is in a depression, who is China going to sell to? How come China isn't in a depression already? But there you are - there's another thing that hasn't happened. Chinese stocks haven't collapsed.

And getting back to commodities, they're all up. Commodity prices don't go up in a depression; everybody knows that. They go down. But commodities are NOT in a bear market. Go figure.

And, of course, there's gold. The metal gave up a dollar on Friday, but it's still just $4 short of the $1,000 mark...and just a shadow below its all-time high. Gold is a commodity...but it's also money in its purest, more reliable form. Commodities go down in a depression. Money goes up. But since gold is an alternative to paper money, it tends to go up only when paper money goes down. As explained above, the dollar has NOT collapsed. So why is gold going up? It should be going down, reflecting the effect of a recession...

There are two possible answers.

First, maybe the iron laws of economics have been repealed.

Or, second...maybe the iron laws just haven't caught up to the market - yet.

Unemployment is at 9.7%. It will probably rise above 10% this month. The economy is supposed to be recovering. Now, The New York Times is talking about a "jobless recovery."

You'll remember the phrase. It came out in 2003. Then, the economy was allegedly recovering from a micro-recession. Economists were surprised that there were so few new jobs created.

What was really happening was that there was no genuine recovery. Consumers just decided to go deeper and deeper into debt - egged on by the feds. A regional governor of the Fed actually urged consumers to "go out and buy an SUV." So Americans bought more products from the Chinese...on credit...and the Chinese enjoyed a boom.

And now the boom is over. Americans are paying down their debt. And unemployment is getting worse. This time the feds are pumping trillions into the system. This time, it's not the consumer who is willing to go further into debt; it's the government. And once again, few new jobs are being created.

Without jobs, the recovery is an impostor...a phony...a fraud. Without jobs, people have no extra spending power. So they can't buy - except by going deeper into debt. They were willing to go further into debt in '03-'07. But not this time. They've reached their limit on debt. Besides, with house prices falling, who would lend to them?

No new jobs = no new income. No new income = no new sales. No new sales = no new profits = no new jobs.

But what about the government? The feds are still willing to borrow. How come federal borrowing can't create a new boom - even if it is a phony one - like the one in 2003-2007?

Federal borrowing, spending, bailouts and monetary inflation are not helping the real economy. But they are making a lot of money available for speculation. That's why so many things are NOT happening. Investors are speculating on commodities, gold and Chinese stocks - for example. And US bonds.

But this is not a durable, reliable trend. And it's not laying the foundation for a genuine recovery. Borrowing by the feds is different from borrowing by individuals. Private households can go broke. But they can't take the dollar down with them. When the feds borrow, they pledge the full faith and credit of the United States - and its currency - as security. So, as they borrow more...the value of the US currency comes into doubt...then, into play...and then into jeopardy.

Investors eventually sell off dollars and US bonds...then, what should happen finally does.

Caution: what has to happen does eventually happen. But it doesn't have to happen when you think it should. The big surprise might be how long it takes before these things happen. If we were Mr. Market, for example, we probably would not take gold much higher - not just yet. We'd let deflation take gold down for a while - long enough to separate the speculators from their money. Then, we'd let investors get used to falling prices - before bringing inflation back.

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Where, Exactly, is this Economy Headed?
• Geithner Reassures China that America Takes Financial Obligations Seriously
• Gold Doesn’t Always Need Inflation to Rise
• Fed Will “Monetize the Debt”
• We Expect No Recovery from the Economy

"Friday's edition of The Wall Street Journal picks up on the theme of the long road of pain ahead for bank shareholders in the US," colleague Dan Amoss tells us. "In 'Banks on Sick List Top 400,' the WSJ details several ugly highlights from the latest FDIC Quarterly Banking Profile, published last Thursday.

"Here are a few:

"1. The FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund is now promising to insure $6.2 trillion in deposits with just $10.4 billion in reserves. Expect to see another "special assessment" cutting a few billion dollars out of bank earnings later this year.

"2. Credit card losses are at a record: 9.95%

"3. 416 banks, or 5% of the nation's banks, are on the 'problem' list.

"4. FDIC-insured banks are sitting on $332 billion in loans more than 90 days past due, up from $290 billion in the first quarter.

"5. Nonperforming loans now make up 2.77% of the entire banking industry's assets. This is up from 1.4% in June 2008 and 0.47% in June 2006. As these loans get 'worked out' in today's credit environment, the market will start to realize how severe net charge-offs will be.

"In this new report, the FDIC published updated figures for the combined noncurrent loans and loan loss allowance at all FDIC-insured institutions. Here is an updated version of the chart we published in the Aug. 14 alert. The new figures - the moves from December 2008 to June 2009 - are highlighted in the dotted lines at the far right of this chart:

"You can see how problem loans are increasing at a much faster rate than the rate at which the banking industry is adding to its loss allowance. This means that published capital ratios are misleadingly high."

Dan's latest short idea for Strategic Short Report is building up its loss allowance at a glacial pace compared with its skyrocketing delinquencies and nonperforming assets. Its management team likes to highlight its strong capital ratios. But when adjusted for the inevitable growth in provision expenses - and the leaner operating income that its shrinking balance sheet will generate - its capital ratios looking ahead to mid-2010 don't look so strong.

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• The FDIC Is in Trouble
• In Europe, Banks Borrow Money and Lend it Back to the Government
• Banks or BHP?
• Good Month for Aussie Stocks, While U.S. Stocks Fell to Close the Quarter
• Today’s Current Gold Price