Transcription
Welcome back. I'm Jeremy Saver. Spot gold this morning holding just above $4,500 as we tape this episode. Silver swinging anywhere between $75 and $76 after a really nice run last week.
And we just saw US crude drop about $100 a barrel, or just below $100 a barrel, on reports that the US is in the final stages of peace talks with Iran, which has helped snap back a three-day losing streak for the S&P 500 ahead of today's massive Nvidia earnings print. Yet the tape is still fighting and flashing tighter financial conditions and renewed stagflation risk. Bond yields are hovering near two-decade highs, and the market is still pricing in risk of a December rate hike. And my guest today says the consensus is wrong. He argues we're entering the final parabolic melt-up of a 44-year bull market, a surge that could drive gold to $6,800 and silver to $180 before triggering an 80% global bust. Now joining me to explain the mechanics of this sequence is David Hunter, chief macro strategist at Contrarian Macro Advisors. David, nice to see you. Welcome.
>> Yeah, hi Jeremy. Thanks for having me on.
>> Yeah, I appreciate the time. Uh, a lot of people were excited about this. Both of our ex accounts were kind of blowing up yesterday talking about you being on the show. And I want to get into, I guess, first the forecast, because you've been forecasting the sequence, the final kind of melt-up followed by an 80% deflationary bust, for quite some time. And, you know, we put our Kitco community to test, asking what they wanted to hear from you today. And YouTube viewer, I think Leia W88, high asked a question on everyone's mind: "Are we looking at a summer story here, or is this melt-up extending into late 2026?"
>> I think it's probably still a summer story. I, um, as I tell people, I'm not a trader, and I'm not trying to say I can pinpoint this thing to, you know, some precise time, but, you know, I will make my guesstimates just like anybody else. And I think given that we're in the final parabolic stage, I think there's a pretty good chance we could see the highs by Labor Day. Um, whether it happens that way or gets pushed out, uh, we'll see. But I suspect, and again, we've been kind of teased with these, um, comments coming out of the administration that we're close to a deal, or we've heard that so many times before. I think the markets kind of show me this time. But, but I think again, Iran holds the cards here. I don't mean Iran the country, but I mean the story. Iran holds the cards in terms of the market. Um, if, if a deal is close, if we get some kind of an agreement here, uh, I think it's off to the races. So if we don't, and this thing drags on, uh, it could push this thing into the fall. But I, I think there's a pretty good chance, and I'm talking about obviously, you know, 30% or more in some of the indexes from here, to say that that can happen by Labor Day. May sound crazy, but that's what a parabolic is, is, you know, things move pretty fast, pretty far.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting. And of course, I saw Bezos this morning, I think he was on CNBC talking about how market sentiment is kind of driving this thing. He said, "Don't worry about it. Best market sentiment is what's driving this thing and will continue." I'm curious. I mean, to get that massive upside, markets traditionally need to kind of expand liquidity, as you know. But looking at the tape today, I mean, the cost of capital is a little bit restrictive. The Fed's dealing with this sticky inflation, and broad money supply seems a little bit tight. Where does the market find the actual monetary fuel to drive a 4,000-point rally on the S&P right now?
>> Yeah, I know there are people that look at M2 and say that that's been growing. That's not something I watch that closely.
>> Um, I, I really am more driven by the sentiment. Um, and whereas Bezos may have meant sentiment, meaning people are bullish and buying,
>> my, my view of sentiment as a contrarian is that it's, it's pretty subdued, particularly since March, because of the war. Um, and that that is a wall of worry that that fuels the advance. So there's money, um, you know, whether it be people switching from more defensive, uh, assets to more aggressive assets, you know, risk-on assets, or whether it's people that did have cash and are going to redeploy it. Um, I, I'm not one that feels like, I mean, we've kind of gotten into that. I've been around 50-plus years in this business. We, you know, we didn't used to think we had to have the Fed printing to see the market go up. And that seems to be a lot of mindset now, is that there has to be that. I think rates will come down. That's certainly a form of liquidity. Um, I think, you know, money coming in as, as institutional investors in particular move to a more, uh, bullish stance. All of that, I think, is part of the fuel to, to what I think is going to be the biggest, steepest rally in this bull market.
>> Yeah. I mean, you know, after this melt-up, you, you forecasted that 80% global kind of deflationary bust. When we reached out to the community, one of the, Matt G, did the math on government spending. It was interesting because according to the Congressional Budget Office, the US is running $2 trillion annual deficits. And then, of course, on top of that, the four biggest tech companies are planning more than $700 billion in capital expenditures this year alone, just for the AI buildout. How does a deflationary bust take hold when, you know, fiscal dominance and kind of big tech are still trying to push that much demand through the system?
>> Yeah, it, it may get pushed out. We'll see. But my, my whole basis is that in 2008-9, we, we saw what was close to a bust. I think we pulled it back from the cliff before it went over. So what I describe is this being 2008-9 on steroids. I, uh, get there more or less, uh, based on the leverage in the system. We are so much more leveraged today than we were going into 2008-9. So I think we're moving towards a recession, and I think this leverage turns an ordinary recession into something far worse. Um, I think the banks, although, you know, they had to get some religion back in 2008-9, particularly in the US, um, you know, and you've had some cleanup in Europe, you know, a lot of banks around the world, particularly in Asia, Canada, etc., are in much worse shape today than they were back in 2008. So, um, I, I think if we move into a recession, and, and don't forget, we've had a balance sheet, you know, the Fed balance sheet move from $9 trillion down to $6.5 trillion.
>> Uh, so, and yet we have everybody talking about the Fed's too easy. Um, you know, rates, rates need to go up, not down. Um, I, I think those are the kind of policy errors, and it's mimicked somewhat over in Europe and elsewhere. Um, you know, certainly Australia has has raised rates. Uh, Canada's kind of in between. Um, but those are the kind of policy errors that I think can, can trigger something that's not expected.
>> Yeah, it's interesting. I mean, in 2008, as you know, David, I mean, the leverage was easier to see because it sat in banks and mortgages. Today, a lot of it is in private markets that don't, you know, they don't, they don't mark daily. How do investors kind of identify the crack before it becomes obvious?
>> Well, I, I put it in two ways. One, you know, um, people mistake my word "bust" for meaning the market's going bust, right?
>> And I say it's a, it's a bear market accompanied by a bust. The bust is the economy and the, the financial system. Um, and the bear obviously is the market. So, you can identify the top in the market. I think when, when you see, as I say, when, when I see everybody's in, when, uh, you know, people are talking about this bull, bull run having two or three years to run, this bull market having two or three years to run, when people are, are kind of all over themselves, um, wanting to buy. Uh, that will be my signal that we're getting very close to a top. We have not seen that. That's really what's fueled this, this long advance from 2022, is that the, particularly institutions have been skeptical all the way up. They started when it moved over 7,000. They started to get bullish. The first time it moved over seven, um, they started finally saying, "Yeah, this is real," and they were raising targets, etc. And then the, you know, the run hit in the 1st of March, and we had that correction, and they, you know, people were tripping over themselves coming up with lower estimates of how far down we were going to go, and the thing reversed, and we're now 7,400, 7,500. Um, and, and, you know, you still have that, that initial beginnings of bullishness move back to the skeptic side. And right now, you've got institutions pretty skeptical here, um, that this thing has much more upside. You know, some will say 7,700 or 800 or 7,600. Uh, but you don't see much above that, and there are others that have kind of said we've already topped. So, I think there's, there's plenty, um, plenty built up in that wall of worry that can switch over to bullishness as this thing gets going again.
>> Yeah. And of course, I guess that brings us to metals, too. I mean, a lot of people, I, I first, I should ask your metals outlook. I know that you were talking $6,800 gold, $180 for silver, but, you know, we saw that slight correction take place. I've been talking to a lot of people. A lot of them just describe it as froth coming out of the system. It went a little bit too high, too fast. Uh, what was your thoughts on that correction?
>> Yeah. Well, if you're talking about the whole correction, it really went a lot more than a little high. It went from from $50 to $120 in a matter of weeks.
>> Um, so,
>> um, you know, that obviously needed to get corrected. It was a parabolic run. Um, normally parabolic runs are end-of-cycle runs, or things that you kind of say, "Hey, maybe that was it." I, in this case, uh, didn't have, I didn't wait very long. It didn't cause me a lot of, uh, consternation in terms of, "Hey, is this the top?" I just said, "Yeah, we need to correct." Um, I thought we were going to get like a 35% correction. In silver, it went down 50% in that initial sell-off, and we've been kind of back and forth in a consolidation ever since for the last couple months. I think we're pretty well done with that. I think we did consolidate that huge run, and I think we're poised for the next leg up, which will be again parabolic, probably even steeper than that one, or certainly similar. Um, and, you know, that's how I get to $180, right?
>> And I'm not so sure that I'm not too conservative still.
>> Yeah, interesting. I mean, you know, silver especially has a a history of violent blow-offs. But if it runs to $180 quickly, why shouldn't investors treat that as an end-of-cycle warning rather than kind of a new secular beginning?
>> Well, I have, I have a long-term forecast of $1,000, but that's out early 2030s. And because of the bust, I, um, you know, I do believe this thing, wherever it goes, whether it's $180, or whether it's, you know, um, Michael Oliver's number of $3 to $500,
>> um, I think it will be, it'll have a blow-off run here this year. Like I said, it could happen by Labor Day. It might take into the fall, but I'm not so worried about the number. You know, my $180 is where I could get to on my work, but I don't, you know, I don't discount the fact that it could blow right through that in a blow-off and take you up to, you know, $250 or higher. So I would not use, uh, that number per se, as much as to realize we're, we're in a, I think a late stage for this cyclical cycle, you know, for this cycle where we're, um, you know, I don't think we go beyond this year. Um, and then because of the bust, all assets, pretty much all assets other than treasuries will go down.
>> Right.
>> Um, you know, silver is very volatile, so that could go down, you know, 50, 60, 70%. Gold, probably less so, maybe 30 or 40%, but it could go 50, and this goes 75%. Um, you know, so there is a downside, I think, because of a global bust. If I'm wrong about the bust, um, you know, maybe it lasts longer, but I think you've got some kind of a cycle end here, um, this year, and obviously I think it's going to be a violent one. So that's why I, I am thinking this is very late in terms of that move. You know, we've come a long way from, you know, silver down at $20, you know, up to $120, and, and in this case, probably up to $180, $200. Um, so it's, um, you know, to me, it's, we're, we're months away from a, a point where you have to make that decision. Uh, not years.
>> So, you still got a little bit of time. I mean, obviously you're talking about that cycle kind of targeting $6,800 for gold as well in this one. On our community poll, one of our viewers, Demad 77, asked about the exact reaction of these metals when the recession kind of actually hits. I mean, do these targets happen before the 80% market wipeout, or are they kind of a, a product of the recovery on the other side?
>> Yeah. No, these are definitely targets prior to the bust and prior to the, you know, the bear market. Um, so, well, like I said, it could happen before Labor Day for both gold and silver and for the stock market. Uh, but it doesn't have to. It could carry. We, we might even see it carry as far as the election or come close.
>> Um, so I'm not so worried about pinpointing that, but it definitely pre-bust. Um, and, and then, you know, you get that correction in the bust, and that should present a generational, uh, opportunity because if, let's say gold does, I'll round the number off because I think I'm probably going to be proven, um, conservative anyway. So, let's say we get $7,000, you get a 50% correction, takes you back down to, you know, $3,500. From there, um, you could see $20,000 in gold by the early 2030s. So, you know, and, and the miners obviously have leverage to that. So, there's, there's another opportunity after this one, but this one still is far from over. There's a big run here.
>> Yeah. It's been wild to watch. I mean, at least on this side of, of the camera covering it. And, I mean, historically, specifically, I guess in 2008, in 2020, precious metals crashed initially because institutions had to liquidate winning positions to cover margin calls. But physical holders don't face that same forced liquidation risk. Separate the vehicles for us here, if you would, you know, physical metal, ETFs, futures, and miners. I mean, which one survived that initial leverage unwind, and, and does the system kind of break down to the point where, you know, only, I guess, physical metal protects capital?
>> Yeah. Well, physical certainly will be the more stable, um, and obviously supply demand, particularly with sovereigns being so interested in it, um, helps hold that up. Um, I'm sure it will, you know, trade down with the paper at some point. It's not going to, it's not going to deviate that much that it goes opposite. Um, but it will be more stable, and, and will probably come down slower. Um, the, you know, the ETFs, we saw this, you know, back in 2020, we saw this in 2008-9, I think.
>> Um, but certainly I remember 2020. Um, you know, you have two things going on then. You have the underlying securities in that ETF under pressure, and then you have all those, and particularly we found out how much institutions use the ETFs. Um, you have the liquidity problem of some, you know, big whales wanting to get out and get out in a hurry. And so the ETFs actually went down farther and faster than did the underlying miners that were in the portfolio. So, so that is a risk that I think you see anytime you have a big downturn. Um, and then, and the miners themselves obviously have plenty of volatility and plenty of risk if, if the metals roll over. So, it's, um, you know, pick your poison. They're all going down, I think. Uh, obviously physical less so, or less, less fast. Um, but I think they're all going to get hit pretty hard. Not nearly, except maybe silver, not nearly as hard as, um, you know, equities themselves.
>> Right? Yeah. I mean, to that point, I mean, you're talking that 50% correction in gold, possibly to kind of pick up that haircut and, and, and re-enter. And miners, obviously, that kind of correction would be brutal. Brutal. And miners would be hit first. If miners have leverage to the upside, obviously they have leverage to the downside. How do investors avoid getting wiped out before the real 2030s opportunity arrives?
>> Um, well, two things. One, if you're investing without leverage,
>> Yeah.
>> um, your own leverage, you know, if you're, you're buying just buying stocks, um, you can hold on. You know, you may not like the volatility in the portfolio valuation, but you can hold on. If you're leveraged, you could get wiped out. So, you know, I would, I would say be cautious as you get closer to the, at least my idea of what the top is. Um, and because once it goes over the other side of the mountain, it can unwind pretty fast, and, you know, if you have leverage, you're going to get wiped out.
>> Yeah. Speaking of moving fast, I mean, the gold market structural changes have been quite stunning. I mean, last year going into this year, and, and this morning I saw Goldman Sachs just projected central banks will step up gold buying to an average 60 tons a month through 2026 in one report. And then at the same time, just this morning, Hong Kong's launching a new gold clearing system in July to offer an alternative to London. David, are sovereign institutions accumulating physical gold right now to front-run the deflationary bust that you're forecasting, or are they strictly preparing for that monetary reset that comes after it?
>> Yeah, I, I think it's more, um, frankly, I don't think a lot of, a lot of central bankers or or policymakers realize that there is a bust coming.
>> I don't think if you talk to them, they have any idea that that's what's coming. They think 2008-9 was kind of the big one, and, and, you know, nothing like that's coming again. So they may worry about a downturn, etc. But I think they're buying, um, gold, um, primarily because of all the debt and money that has been put out there over, you know, since 2008, and particularly since 2020. Um, I, I think people realize that fiat currencies are not, not the, um, sound money story today. And obviously, we have things like the BRICS, you know, looking to try to create a, a gold-backed currency. And, you know, China, China, I think understands maybe pretty well what's coming in the future. Uh, and they want gold. Um, so I, I, I don't think it's because they're worried about a bust. They're more worried about fiat currency.
>> Yeah. I mean, central banks are building infrastructure, I guess, alternative infrastructure to London, you know, as I just mentioned there, and accumulating physical supply that could establish a stronger structural floor and limit the severity of a gold drawdown. Does sovereign wealth acting, does it kind of act as a buyer of last resort? Does that change the crash narrative for gold at all?
>> Um, it may. Hey, I don't think it will. I mean, just look, look at near-term what we've seen in, in both gold and silver in just the last few months.
>> So, if, if it can do that, and when we're in, you know, a reasonably healthy economy, what happens in a, in a bad economy, uh, and what could be more than a bad economy? Um, I just think sovereigns may step away to some extent during that time. Um, so I, I don't think so. Um, I may be surprised by that, but I think you can, as I tell people, I think you can look at somewhere between, you know, for 35 and 50% downside in gold from a top, and probably 50 to 75% in silver. So, um, you know, may not be as bad as that, but I think that's what should be anticipated.
>> Yeah, you brought up that silver run-up where you, you know, it happens so fast. I mean, the $50 to $120. I mean, it feels like silver's already acting like a stress asset and a momentum asset at the same time. Is there a specific kind of signal that tells you that this move is institutional accumulation, not just funny, uh, funny money, some would call it, but not just fast money speculation?
>> Yeah, I don't, I don't have any that can tell you that. I mean, I think it's both. You know, frankly, I don't think institutions have yet really warmed up to it.
>> Yeah.
>> It's, it's been, um, for the longest time, you know, gold was, uh, not even looked at as, uh, an important piece of portfolios until recently. And so then they say, "Oh, maybe you should have 5 to 10%," and some people 20% in gold. Silver, I think, is is far less, um, looked at as something that institutions need to have in their portfolios or wealth managers have put in portfolios. What happens, I think, is momentum starts, you know, attracting attention, and institutions start moving away from kind of stubbornness of saying, "Yeah, we don't need silver, it doesn't, you know, doesn't fit our parameters," and they start realizing that, you know, it's, it's a runaway freight train in terms of momentum, and that they should be on board. So, as always, I think psychology plays a role, both for retail and for institutions. But, but frankly, I don't think they've really, uh, obviously there are institutions out there that are buying, but I don't think, in, in the main part, there are all that many institutions that are, uh, really paying much attention to silver at this point. I think as we move into this next leg up and get over $100 again, I think that run from $100 to say $200, uh, because I do think $180 is going to prove low. I think in there, you will see a lot more institutional buying, and that's part of that run-up.
>> I mean, on, we should talk about the, the retail investment demand as well as the industrial. I mean, at $180 an ounce, obviously the physical market changes drastically. Solar, EV, the electronics manufacturers operate under severe margin pressure already. I was looking at this report. When silver recently touched $90, it made up about 29% of the cost of a solar panel. We know it's not just solar panels made out of silver. But at double that price, physical demand could slow a little sharply. We could substitute, you know, redesign, maybe copper. Um, if industrial buyers pull back to save margins, does retail investment demand have enough volume to kind of sustain that $180 price tag on its own?
>> Yeah, as I say, I don't think it's just going to be retail. I think it's also going to be institutional. I think, I think them, the run from $100 to $200 is going to be dominated by speculation, by chasing momentum,
>> far more than physical. So, uh, yeah, they will more than make up, I think, for any physical drop-off.
>> Yeah. And of course, we know that on the physical side,
>> you know, a lot of that has already been purchased. And so it's, it's really next year's, um, contract that they are worried about, you know, so at least between now and the end of this year, I'm sure the physical pretty well already been priced, you know, they've already priced their their purchases.
>> Yeah. It's an interesting macro environment. And of course, we should talk about bonds, too, because if you've been watching the market this week, you know, 30-year past 5%. I want to pull up a post you made on X this morning regarding the bond market. I was talking to somebody. I put out a thing, and somebody was asking you about discussing yields. They said that you mentioned they're kind of bottoming, sees a correlation here with oil. Um, you wrote, "Rates are topping, bonds are bottoming. The Iran conflict and the closing of the Strait has driven up oil prices. That can and will reverse when we get a resolution." Uh, just this morning, we saw crude drop below $100 on reports that the US is nearing a deal with Iran. David, I mean, assuming you're right and the geopolitical premium washes out, what happens to the bond thesis if inflation remains sticky anyway?
>> Yeah, I think, well, I think inflation is still in a downtrend. You know, it's very contrary right now. But, yeah, um, other than oil prices spiking from, you know, $65 to $120, or, you know, and now over $100, or soon recently over $100. Um, it, it obviously changed the expectations for inflation. It, it there were some other things that got influenced, fertilizer prices, etc. So, and we saw PPI print not too long ago. Um, you know, certainly it drove up prices in the short run. You're going to see the same reaction in the, in the opposite direction. Uh, I think if, if the, uh, Strait gets opened, and, and we have a real deal in terms of Iran that people trust and believe it's, it's actually happening. Um, you know, Iran's been basically the whole story between March 1st and now. Um, and I think people underestimate how fast we can go back down. Um, what I see a lot, because I get a pushback a lot about recently about the fact that, you know, it's going to take a while to to get that oil flowing again, that there's, because inventories have been drawn down, there's going to be a period here where we're not flushed with oil because it's not in the market, you know, it's not in those markets yet. It's, it's in transit. And I just come back with, markets are discounting, uh, are, are a discounting function. They look at the future. They're not focused on the supply at any given time versus the demand. They're, they're looking at what is, what is, what's going on with the opening of the Strait, for example, what is that going to have in terms of implications down the road. So, so I think the, the fact that the Strait's closed, and that the, you know, that there's, there's going to be a period of time where oil's not going to be in the markets where it's needed yet, um, that's all discounted.
>> Yeah.
>> It can be, it can be pushed up higher if, again, we have a false alarm here and there's no agreement, or if it looks like, you know, there's going to be more military intervention and it's going to get messy. I'm not saying that this has to be, you know, down from here, but I'm saying if it is, uh, I think you'll see it back into the 70s pretty quickly. And, and I've had a lot of pushback on that because people think, you know, that's way too optimistic given that that oil has to get from the Strait into markets.
>> That takes, you know, that takes time.
>> And, and I mean, to your point, though, you know, oil is lower today. But that's, I mean, Bloomberg's reporting just this morning, US crude inventories, including the strategic reserves, just had the biggest draw on record as exports surge. I mean, if, if oil is really rolling over, is it kind of rolling over, or are we just draining the cushion to keep prices contained?
>> Um, we already did that. I mean, that's, that may have been part of the story the last month, but
>> um, it's, it will be rolling over. If this is truly an agreement, it will be rolling over. We're not going back up. Those that are sitting here thinking, "Well, reality will hit. We'll find out that, you know, it's, it's going to be a couple few months before we get this thing back in order and oil's going to $150." I think they're they're going to be very disappointed or surprised.
>> Um, I, you know, I think we will see oil back down into the 70s based on oil flowing through the Strait.
>> Yeah. Maybe that's overly optimistic. Um, we'll see.
>> Well, a lot of people hoping for it. Uh, the margins getting a little bit tapped. Um, you know, if, obviously, we, we live with this Wall Street versus Main Street kind of narrative, as we saw yesterday on on X. I mean, if oil and insurance and food and power and financing costs kind of remain elevated, households may not experience that downtrend. Is, is the Fed looking at the same inflation trend consumers are living with?
>> Um, some of the Fed are certainly, they're, you know, you're hearing talk from Qashqari and, and a few of the others that rates might be hiked. Um, I think, and then there are others I think are in neutral ground. There aren't too many that are looking to cut, I think, at this point. Um, I don't know whether Kevin Worsh is or not. We'll find out soon enough. Um, but again, I believe inflation was in a downtrend that got interrupted by Iran. If we get Iran straightened out, it may take a few months to have it show up in the numbers, but I think the market will look ahead and start, um, moving back towards, um, inflation's heading lower, not higher.
>> Um, I think our economy is, is soft and getting softer. Obviously, we've got, uh, what I call a have and have-not economy, a K-shaped economy, whatever you want to call it,
>> but half where half the consumers are barely getting by. They're, you know, they're having to borrow from Peter to pay for pay for Paul. You know, they, um, they don't have enough, you know, they're living paycheck to paycheck, and, and the big run-up in gasoline caused them to have to pull back on other things. So, so I think that's going to continue to be a story that as we move through this year, the economy is going to be slowing. It may be disguised a bit because the manufacturing sector is so strong, given the, you know, the buildout for AI.
>> Mhm.
>> And power. Um, but underneath the surface, you know, consumers, still a big part of our economy, obviously. Uh, underneath the surface, things are slowing, and that's why I, I think we move into recession late this year, early next, and into a bust, uh, for much of next year, probably.
>> Yeah. You know, you just brought up a little bit about AI, and, and there's new reporting that shows that the bond market sees AI making the Fed's inflation bind worse, not better, at least for now. Tech companies have already issued hundreds of billions of dollars in debt to fund AI infrastructure, while demand for chips and power and data center capacity is obviously pushing up that capital needs. It seems like it's going higher and higher. Hey, I mean, the CME Fed wedge tool is still pricing in a 40% chance of a rate hike by December. What is the rationale for investors buying long-duration bonds right now and, and stepping in front of a potential AI-driven inflation shock?
>> Um, well, from my standpoint, it's because I think that I don't buy into that rhetoric, that, uh, narrative at all.
>> Um, I understand it. I understand why people might might be there. I, I think that's what's in the market right now. This last run-up, uh, from the low fours to 4.65, or wherever we went to on the 10-year, I think discounted all of that narrative. And I think again, it's an if, but if we are close to an agreement in Iran, I think that narrative tops out here. And, you know, we're down at, I don't know where we are now, but we were down at, um, 4.58 last I looked. Yeah.
>> Um, earlier today. So, you know, if you're, if you're coming down from high 4.60s to, you know, 4.58, just based on the possibility, if you actually get an, um, an agreement and oil, you know, starts heading south in a hurry, I think you'll see we'll, we'll be back at 4% pretty quick on the, quickly on the 10-year. And I'm, I'm saying we could be at 3% or below by the end of the year.
>> Wow. Wow. That would be quite, I mean, a great event. And of course, the things that we cover here wouldn't surprise me. David, and this is why we wanted you on. And we, we got to kind of talk a little bit about what, what breaks first. I mean, you've warned that the leverage in the system will cause a crisis worse than 2008, specifically talking about that private credit and private equity and pensions. Uh, where do you see the first structural fracture kind of occurring that actually shifts the market from the melt-up into the bust?
>> Yeah, it's hard to say, but I, what I have said is that I think it could come from outside this country.
>> You know, it could be Japan, it could be Asia, it could be Europe, uh, could be, you know, Canada's not in great shape right now. Um, so I, as you know, in 2008, everything kind of centered here. We really were the trigger, and everything kind of flowed from that. This one could be more outside our shores. And with us being part of it, but not the lead in it, um, we'll see. I mean, it's, it's hard to say. Um, you know, there's so many areas that I think are showing cracks, but not, not in people. You know, wasn't that long ago private equity was center stage, and people were, were certainly messaging me and saying, "Is this it?" as you know, I think your, your, um, your bust is coming sooner. And I said, "No, it's, these are the kind of early signals that were moving in that direction, but they're nowhere near at the point where it's going to really break." And I think that will, those, those kind of cracks will accumulate over the balance of this year and early next. And it's when they kind of reach a critical mass that that this can happen. But it's, it's hard to say which, which trigger it's going to be or what the catalyst will be. As I say, my bigger picture is that it's, I kind of put it in a formula of, um, leverage, massive leverage, like far beyond anything this world's ever seen before, going into a downturn. Um, added, add to that, um, the fragility that was caused, even though it's six years removed now, by the pandemic and what we did, you know, in terms of shutting down the world economy, and there's still a lot of fragility around the world in Europe and Asia that I think stems from that, and, and even here, statistically, things look pretty good under the surface, not everybody came right back from that, and so there's fragility in the system. And then third, policymaker error. And I, you know, typically central banks are the big ones that make that error, but it, it can be a multiple, a multitude of things there. Um, you add all those three together, and I think it can turn into a bust.
>> Okay. I mean, if, if the bust starts offshore, which is, uh, fascinating. I mean, US investors may not see it coming through the S&P first, like you said. I mean, all the things in the news, the yen, the JGB yields, European bank spreads. I mean, we could talk about Canadian housing, dollar funding stress. Um, what is the overseas equivalent of a subprime today?
>> I think probably one of them is, is, uh, you know, Japan.
>> Um, you know, basically they, they ran a very aggressive policy to keep themselves going, uh, at zero rate policy for a lot longer than we did, and we did it for way too long. Um, and I think you run the risk because you're seeing it now. If inflation breaks out there, and rates break out there, talk about leverage, they are leveraged to that zero rate policy, and it, it won't, you know, it'll tip over pretty, pretty hard if, if things get out of control there. So, I think that's certainly one that could be like subprime was back in 2008.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Of course,
>> the other thing is it's more adding up all of them. It's all part of that leverage. But, you know, people don't realize private equity, you know, private, private credit is obviously a big off-balance sheet story now, and one that's not tracked like banks. You know, you don't have, you don't have bank regulators watching it. So, so that can be something. But people kind of forget about, um, private equity. But private equity, um, you know, basically it's what, what in my old, in the old days back in the mid-80s, it was leverage buyouts, you know, has a, a prettier name now, private equity, but, you know, there's so much leverage there. And that, don't, don't forget, we have a lot of pension funds,
>> yeah,
>> that are looking at private equity and private credit as things that are not as volatile. They can put them in their portfolios and, and not have to worry about the market volatility. Uh, and so they were taking on, you know, alternative investment in general, they were taking on more and more, um, percentage of of pension portfolios. And I, we have not yet really had a cycle where we've tested that. And I, I think that's another piece of this puzzle. Not to mention, I mean, we, we have spent an awful lot of money, um, putting, um, uh, illegal immigrants on on our, you know, our welfare program, on our, our system. Um, and everybody just acts like that money just comes, you know, gets created out of air and we're fine. And when we go the other way, we're going to find out the limitations of how much we've piled onto our system. You know, we, we see it through the obviously the, the debt, the government debt, but it's, you know, municipalities, states, um, you know, and the federal government are all way over-leveraged compared to any other cycle we've had.
>> Yeah. And I mean, it's a good point. I mean, in public markets, panic shows up immediately. In private equity and private credit, the losses can be hidden under what? Refinancing, redemptions,
>> and it is cumulative. I mean, if, if all of a sudden housing rolls over,
>> Yeah.
>> and you get a 30% hit to housing next year, um, and, and people don't have the money to pay these inflated taxes that are coming because of the, the massive money spent in, on school budgets, for example. You know, all that is just, it works until it doesn't work, and then it kind of everything comes on at once, and, uh, it, it becomes cumulative. What does that mean for people's pensions? I mean, obviously the Fed has the printing press to kind of backstop that FDIC-insured bank deposits, but these pension plans in private vehicles, I mean, they don't receive the same protection in that specific environment. I mean, do, do investors have any safe harbor for cash outside of short-term treasuries?
>> Yeah, I, I don't even think of short-term treasuries. I, I have said for a long time that, um, the two things that I think will hold up in the bust,
>> will be treasuries across the entire, entire curve. Uh, because frankly, if I, I expect the, the 10-year to drop to zero, the 30-year to drop to a quarter to a half percent. You know, in, in 2020, I think we got down to 4% on the 10-year, and maybe 0.8 on the, the 30-year. So I think we have one higher high in the bond market. It'll be a secular market top, uh, the likes of which we won't see for the next decade, for sure. Um, but, but I think you get that. So treasuries, I think that cross the curve makes sense. Um, and yes, you're right. The FDIC will be, I, I feel very confident saying that the FDIC will be funded to whatever is necessary to meet the liabilities that are out there, um, beyond $250,000 per institution. It's hard to say, but what I can say is that you can use probably use 2008-9 as some sort of a guide. Um, you know, we had the don't break a buck in the money market funds, you know, so they held together. Um, they bailed out the banks, obviously, uh, that were basically zeroed out, um, because of subprime. Um, I think I'm, I have said many times in the last several years that I expect the Fed balance sheet to grow by at least $20 trillion. Meaning we grew it by $5 trillion in response to the pandemic. We grew it by $3.7 trillion post-2008.
>> And so we got up to $9 trillion after being $875 billion going into 2008. You know, going into October 2008. Um, we went from $875 billion to $9 trillion over the next 15 years. Um, I think we can go from $9 trillion to probably $30 trillion or more, um, in response to the bust, if I'm right about the, what this is going to be.
>> A free-falling banking system around the world will, will, even though the central bankers will all swear to you today they learned their lesson, and they're not going back to QE infinity, and they're not going back to, you know, zero interest rate policy. When you're faced with a free-falling financial system, there's only one thing they can do, and that is print. And I think it's going to take a lot of printing because of leverage in the system to stem the tide. Um, so if we're, if we're going to print, just looking at the Fed, if we're going to print $20, $20 trillion, just as a seat-of-the-pants guess, um, that money is going to go in all kinds of places, including probably bailing out pension funds, and bailing out municipalities, and bailing out states, and, um, bailing out, you know, um, funds, etc. So, you know, we won't, I would be surprised if, if the US has bail-ins in their banks. You know, I can't speak for Europe because they have a precedent there, but at least here, I think you'll see that money will, will be, you know, they'll figure out a way to make that happen where they're, they're bailing out bigger monies. Um, I would not be complacent with that because none of that is guaranteed. The FDIC has a guarantee. You know, Treasury has a, a government guarantee behind it. So, those things we know. What we don't know is what they'll do in terms of, you know, because they're going to be trying to save the system.
>> Yeah. Absolutely. And, and, you know, before I let you go, we got so many people asking us about miners. You know, what a volatile market it's been. I mean, it could move with gold, move with silver, have a drawback. I mean, where are we in the mining cycle right now? Are miners still in the early accumulation phase? Are they closer in this rerating phase, or are we closer to a blow-off more than investors want to admit?
>> I, I think we're very close to the end of the consolidation that, uh, kind of tracked the metals themselves, not surprisingly.
>> You know, the miners were more volatile even than the metals, obviously. But, um, people have to remember, we, we have basically, even at these corrected levels, you know, these stocks are up probably three and fourfold from where they were, you know, 18 months ago.
>> And, uh, I think they have, in many cases, three, three-plus fold to go. So, you know, just as an example, my silver miner junior, DSJ, I have a target on that of $90. So, um, you know, it's currently what, $28 and change?
>> Um, so you're more than a triple there. You know, SIL, I have a target of, um, $220. Um, you know, GDX, I have a target of, I think, um, $180, if I remember right, and GDXJ, I have a target of $250. So if you do the, the numbers, the silver miners, I think have triples ahead or more, um, and, and junior miners, probably more than that. Um, and, and the, um, the gold, at least, you know, doubles or more. Um, so, you know, I think there's big upside, and again, that's not two years out. I think we see that this year.
>> Um, so,
>> it's, it's really a case where, yes, you have to take some volatility, and if you have leverage, you may get, you know.
Get get taken away from you. But if you are invested in these, I think you'd be a happy camper between now and the end of this year.
Yeah, and if, and I think it could happen by Labor Day. But I, you know, with those kind of moves, you just, you know, have to give yourself a little more time.
Yeah. Interesting. I mean, if we're ending kind of that consolidation phase, does that set up an M&A wave? Obviously, I know Equinox, there's been some interesting deals in the sector lately, but are the seniors about to buy ounces because it's cheaper to acquire reserves than to build them?
You would think so. It's been, it's been remarkable really comparing this cycle to past cycles where M&A came in very early on. And, you know, the, the, uh, the CEOs got very excited about buying, uh, stuff cheap while because they saw, you know, they saw these things taking off and in a lot of cases, um, then things rolled over and they didn't, you know, their operations didn't look great because they had leveraged themselves up. This time around, they seem to be more focused on maintaining, cleaning up their operations, maintaining the efficiencies and and not doing that because they, they got burnt in previous cycles and they got criticized from what they did back then. So, it's been remarkable to see a little bit more discipline in that industry. It's not known for any discipline. Um, and we have seen more of it this time around. There's been, as you say, there's been some M&A work, but, but, uh, not nearly as much as you might have thought given the move in the medals.
Um, I do think probably this, you know, this move between May and and, uh, fall, uh, we'll probably see a lot more M&A because it is getting harder to find, you know, the, the, um, to extract the metals, to find places where you can do it at a reasonable price. And so they're going to be looking and saying, "Hey, I can, I can buy it better than I can develop it."
And I mean, you know, miners are not just a gold proxy. I mean, they're, they're operating businesses. They got cost inflation just like us, you know, permitting risks, financing risks. In your framework, what changes that finally makes generalist capital treat miners as a serious asset class again?
Probably the price of the metal, you know, more than anything. And, and we're finding obviously there are more uses for silver now. Um, it's not hard to see that it's become a, a metal that's in, you know, in, uh, at center stage now in terms of, um, you know, people need to acquire it. So I think that brings it more mainstream, maybe not quite to the extent of a copper, but, you know, it is recognized as a, a crucial metal in, in various operations now. Um, so that and again, the sovereign interest in gold. Uh, and even here, obviously, we have, we have, um, people maybe somewhat connected to this administration. Uh, Judy Shelton probably comes to mind. Uh, people who do believe that we should go back to some sort of a gold, um, back dollar. I, I have said pretty consistently for the last several years because of what I think is coming in the bust that, um, you're not going to see it before the bust. Um, and that even if they wanted to, it'd be suicide. If they, if they tied the dollar to gold before the bust or on the, on the either the bust, um, they'd be tying their hands in terms of what's going to be necessary to bail us out. Um, because there really is no other tool if we're having a free falling financial system. I'm, I'm not endorsing it. I'm not saying that it's long-term a good thing to be printing money like that. It's going to create a lot bigger problems next cycle in terms of inflation, big inflation. Um, I'm just saying it's almost, it's the only tool you have. You're either going to, if you're a policymaker, are you going to say let the system crash and pick up the pieces afterwards and that's, I mean, that's major depression, or you're going to say we can't let this go and you're going to have to step in and and step in with a lot of money. Um, if you had a gold back dollar, uh, gold back currencies anywhere, it limits what you can do. Um, so I think I think it will pick up speed in terms of, uh, wanting to do that on the other side of this once they see where inflation's going, but I don't see it happening in the next couple of years.
Right. You know, that's, I love Judy Sheldon. She's been on the show a couple times. I mean, we'll have her back on again. Is the Gold Link reset a rescue plan or is it proof that the fiat system already failed?
Um, I, I think they see it as, uh, proof that the system's already failed and they need to fix it. Um, uh, uh, you know, I don't, I don't look it as a rescue plan. I, I view it as people looking backwards at what happened. Hey, we got to fix this. You know, we got to figure out something better. But I, it's gonna be very hard to do. If gold's, you know, on its way to 20,000, uh, late this decade, early next, and you know, you're, you're trying to figure out how do you, how do you tie it to your currency? It's going to be an expensive proposition, uh, to do. Um, so I, I think it's a, you know, let me put it this way. The Austri Austrians have been talking about reset for a long time, uh, and like it's right around the corner for a long time.
Yeah. Um, I, I think it's more likely we see a reset middle of next decade when everything comes crashing down because I, you know, this global bust is not, is not that depression. I, I think we're at the end of a super cycle, which I define as a long cycle between two depressions. The 1930s being the last depression. I think the mid 2030s being the next depression and it happens to be 100 years. It's not, I'm not doing it based on that. But, um, I think if we, if we get what I'm calling for in terms of global bust and the inevitable response to that is 20 trillion from here and 50 trillion, maybe from the central banks overall or whatever. Um, you're going to see inflation, I think by early next decade in the 25% range. We got, I was, I was around as a penman equity manager back in the early 1980s when we saw, you know, 20% inflation. Um, I think we're going to exceed that. Uh, and in this country. So 25% inflation gets you, you know, interest rates probably up in the high teens. Um, and if you have interest rates in the high teens and you have, um, you know, debt, you know, global debt, which is three, say 330 trillion today, could be 450 trillion or more, uh, after the bust because of all that will happen during the bust, mostly sovereign, um, and, and obviously government debt here that's through the roof. Uh, you can't solve that equation. You, we can't, we can't service our debt at 5%. I don't know how we're going to service it at 15 or 20%. So, so that, that's where you then can get a collapse following that. Um, and it's in that collapse, which will, I think be far bigger than the 1930s. Um, it's in that that, you know, you're going to be rebuilding whatever and starting from scratch.
I think you could see something then. But you could also see a lot of other things, including totalitarianism and anarchy, etc. It's hard to know what will come out of something as dire as that.
Yeah. Yeah. Well said. Uh, history does tend to repeat itself and, uh, I mean, we've been talking here for almost 50 minutes. The contrarian me has to ask because I mean, obviously every macro forecast carries risk and you've been calling for the sequence for some time. What specific data points or would it be policy shift or maybe a market action that would have to cross your desk to prove you wrong or force you to kind of abandon that 80% bust thesis?
Yeah, I was going to say we're, we're so far into the bull market. I'm, you know, I'm right about that wherever it tops out. Uh, you know, I was pretty much the, the, uh, one lone voice out there talking about these crazy numbers of, you know, I've raised my numbers from, you know, 6,000 to 7,000 to 8,000 to to 9,500 now. So, um, but, you know, we're so far along in that. So, that's not wrong. But the bust is the area where, yeah, I could be wrong. Um, and, um, maybe we have an ordinary recession to end the cycle. The, the thing that really, uh, stands out for me is the leverage. I just, even though a lot of it is sovereign, I just think we are, there's a lot that isn't sovereign, we are so overleveraged in so many places and we're so far removed, even though it's just last, you know, really the last big cycle was 2008. Um, you know, people have forgotten some of those lessons. So, um, but I could be wrong, I guess, um, in that you don't have something as severe as that, right? Uh, and if you don't have something as severe as that, you're not going to have the, the, you know, the huge unwind, uh, in the financial system. Um, you know, um, pretty confident that we're heading for it, but that's where.
Forever. You can't print forever. It seems like, you know, uh, okay, I want to leave, uh, the viewers with kind of a hard takeaway. I mean, for the investors sitting at home right now, they're watching this. They've been watching this intensely. They've felt the inflation. They felt debasement. I mean, what is the single kind of undeniable macroeconomic signal that tells you or not tells you, maybe tells them that the meltup phase is over and it's time to reassess their exposure?
Yeah. Again, like I said early in this, it's, it truly is going to be sentiment. I think when you see all of Wall Street talking very bullishly and telling you this thing has legs and can run till 2028 or nine or what have you, uh, they give you the AI story that is, you know, just beginning. It's in its infancy. It's got a long way to go. When they're all in, when they put all their chips in, uh, and retail will be there, too. Um, it's at that point that I will say, um, maybe you're gonna miss out on some upside.
Yeah.
But boy, this thing can't, can't go on forever. And, and there's, you know, sentiment is sentiment drives my work. It's my, you know, it's the priority thing in my work. When when sentiment is that far bullish, um, it's time to say it's at least begin hedging my way to the other side. You know, whether you, whether you go all out or whether you just start unwinding, but people should know, uh, that, um, they don't want to be too early because what will happen is if, and this has happened already for a lot of people, I think they go, I'm not smart enough to pick the top. This thing's, you know, already a bubble. I'm getting out. And I just forewarned them that what's going to happen based on my read of psychology of a lot of people is that, um, let's say this thing does run another 30%. They're going to, they're going to be saying, "Wow, I misread that. I got to get back in. Everybody's telling me this thing has legs and I got to get on." And then they end up, you know, outsmarting themselves. They got out, uh, too early and they got back in right at the wrong time. So, just understand yourself and know your, your kind of psych psychological makeup. If you can fight the crowd, then that, that's not a big deal for you. Uh, being early is a lot better than being late. But just know that, that there is that risk of getting out too early. On the other hand, also know that when this thing unwinds, it'll unwind fast because of that leverage. So, um, the top doesn't mean it tops one day and it's straight down the next. You know, tops are a process and they can last for a month or two. Uh, or they can unwind. You know, the first step down could be fast and then then some kind of walking around the bush. But, um, but just know that the other side of this can be faster than the, the buildup to the top.
Yeah, well said, David Hunter, chief macro strategist at Contrarian Macro Advisors. Thank you for walking us through the data and the mechanics of the forecast today. Uh, interesting times, David.
That for sure. Thanks, Jeremy.
I appreciate your time. Thanks so much for joining us.
All right, I'm Jeremy Saffron. Thank you for watching KCO News. Be sure to subscribe. Let us know what signal you're watching to know when the market turns. We'll see you next time. Heat. Heat.