“Print ‘Till You Drop” Update

In Scenario One: “Print ‘Till You Drop” I estimated the market would continue to drop until monetary policy (the Federal Reserve printing money) or fiscal policy (Government spending and borrowing money) began to re-inflate the economy and consequently the markets. The timing of the turnaround would be dependent on the “pain” felt by investors and politicians. My estimate was +/- Labor Day because it takes time to implement these programs and the election cycle begins to heat up.

Also, my assumption was a new stimulus program would be initiated (and one was introduced by President Obama as a “Jobs Program” for $445 billion) and a new Quantitative Easing (QE3) program from the Federal Reserve. The political mood is against more stimuli at the moment, but the Republicans can’t resist tax cuts so I assumed about $300 or $350 billion would get through the Congress. Net/Net: we basically have two options: Re-inflate the economy and markets (print ‘till you drop) or revert to a capitalist system (small government and a privately run economy.)

Since there is little chance we will go back to a capitalist system, my assumption was that the government would be “accommodative.” This assumption appeared to be correct when the debt ceiling was raised with almost no cut in spending until 2013. Then, a month ago, Fed Chairman Bernanke extended the zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) through at least mid-2013 and a statement that the Fed would remain “accommodative.” He re-iterated that statement when he was in Minneapolis a few weeks ago.

In the meantime, it was leaked that the Fed would, at minimum, initiate a “Twist” program. This program would sell about $400 billion of short-term treasuries and buy $400 billion of long-term treasuries in order to drive down long-term interest rates and help the housing industry refinance. This program would not increase the money supply (sell 400, buy 400) so it would not help re-inflate GDP or the markets. In fact, Since QE2 ended, money supply would actually contract because he did not replace the $600 billion in new money he printed for QE2. As you know, contraction takes away from GDP and thus the markets.

By the way, by itself, “Twist” will not help the housing situation either. It will also cause the yield curve to flatten (not much difference in interest rates between two year bonds and 30 year bonds) which takes the profits out of lending.

Many thought, me included, that the Fed would “surprise” the markets with additional easing or money printing. For example, stop paying banks interest for excess reserves held at the Fed which would force the banks back into the lending business. Also, to push additional money into the financial system to cause inflation (help GDP, help the markets, reduce value of the dollar to help with exports.)

On Wednesday, the surprise was that the Fed did not agree to create more money. Evidently, we have not reached their pain threshold yet. However, within hours of the Fed announcement, European markets began to fall apart again. World GDP growth rates were reduced, including the U.S. So, the question becomes: is this enough pain or do we have to wait until the next Fed meeting in November? Or is the political will to spend more money just not there?

The Lack Of Consumer Spending Is The Problem, Right?

Everyone knows that what is causing the recession is the “gap” in consumer spending, Right? That is the explanation according to Keynesian economics and that’s what we have been told. So after spending trillions of dollars trying to fill the consumer spending “gap” and creating $15 trillion in debt; we have been told (Paul Krugman, et.al.) that we just didn’t spend enough.

Great, so we are now about to spend some more on: 1, a new “jobs” bill that will do nothing but add to the debt and accomplish nothing long-term and 2, a new Quantitative Easing Program ( QE3 or money printing) to help the banks and hurt savers.

Printing money does levitate the market, especially when the new printed money goes to banks who can then invest it in the capital markets and in higher paying foreign investments. BUT, consumer spending is not our problem. Here are some numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (dollars in trillions) that prove the point.

Year....................2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Government
Expenditures...........$4.14 $4.43 $4.73 $4.99 $5.26

Personal
Consumption............$9.52 $10.00 $9.74 $10.34 $10.45

Private Fixed
Investment
(Business
Spending)..............$2.26 $2.26 $2.12 $1.70 $1.72

This is telling us that the real problem is Business Investment. It is down by $539 billion or 23% from the peak in 2007; and running at about 76% of the 2006 level.

Isn’t this the real question: Why are businesses unwilling to invest and grow? Or is all the investment overseas where the business climate is more favorable?