New York Times: "Lack of major war may be hurting economic growth"
Question: Could this be true?
Under our Keynesian ecnomic system, used by both political parties, this headline/thought seems normal. How? Because we measure GDP (the economy) by the consumption of wealth rather than the production of wealth, it must be that manufacturing munitions and using them to blow up people and wealth is a way to generate economic growth.
Read the article here
Showing posts with label keynesian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label keynesian. Show all posts
Sunday, June 15, 2014
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
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?
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?
Thursday, October 21, 2010
It’s Time To Look At America’s Two Economies
Today, when you open the business section of your newspaper or watch financial news on television, it is obvious that we have moved from an entrepreneurial economy toward a very centrally planned economy. Fiscal and monetary policies have become almost an obsession. Politicians and pundits have convinced most people that the government can and should solve any problems we have. And as you know, politics drives fiscal and monetary policy. Therefore, it is important that each of us have a longer-term understanding and outlook of the economy; and it must be as non-partisan as humanly possible.
Following is my view. This view may differ from yours because my assumption is that the economy and markets do not work, except on a very long-term basis, the way most people think they should.
First, we need to put the real economy (not just the political economy we read about every day) into context so we can distinguish the actual economy from the artificial, centrally planned economy. This makes it possible to see the two economies. Once you understand both, you will be in a position to develop a short-term plan for your business and your investments; and a longer-term plan for when these two economies collide.
Most people think that when the economy (GDP) grows, corporate profits grow which causes stock prices to increase. This is true if you are thinking very long-term. But what really causes the economy to grow is when the government increases the money supply (prints money.)
GDP growth, by definition, is only possible if you increase the money supply. If the money supply did not increase, you would have a fixed number of dollars in the economy. Therefore, increased spending in one area of the economy would cause a decline in another area with net, aggregate growth of zero.
If the definition of economic growth was more wealth, rather than more money, the economy could certainly grow if GDP stays at zero. Think about how technology has increased our wealth over the years at the same time that prices were are being consistently reduced.
However, the problem with increasing the money supply is:
1.It decreases the value of the dollar, reducing buying power, which then causes inflation.
2.It causes malinvestments (investments go into marginally productive ventures that cannot sustain themselves once interest rates rise or when credit or money is withdrawn from the financial system.) It can/does cause bubbles.
3.It reduces the ability of productive companies to obtain the capital they need) long-term) crowding out real productive ventures.
Current fiscal and monetary policy
The Federal Reserve Bank, using a government (Keynesian) periscope, has decided that we are not de-leveraging (bringing prices back to equilibrium); we are instead close to falling into deflation. This Keynesian definition means a chronic slowing of consumer spending or demand. It is not the original or traditional definition of deflation which is a contraction of the money supply.) Therefore, the Fed is expected to soon (maybe in November) begin the second round of quantitative easing (printing money.)
Therefore, to increase consumer demand, the Fed plans to hold interest rates artificially low and pump money into the banking system to incentivise the consumer. This, plus continuous stimulus programs and overspending tax collections have not worked to date. Some of the reasons are:
1.Banks have over $1 trillion in excess reserves but are not lending (for several reasons) so credit expansion is not occurring which is necessary to hype demand
2.We have had over $900 billion in stimulus programs plus $2.7 trillion in “additional” government spending over the past two years. GDP has risen by about $800 billion over the same two-year period.
3.A lot of this money has found its way into emerging countries in the form of investments. Two emerging countries have started to tax foreign investment funds in order to slow down their growth.
Conclusion
Government (fiscal and monetary) policy cannot continue down this same path much longer without it causing horrendous inflation. Our debt and committed future obligations already exceed 100% of current, tax collections for many decades into the future.
Plus, we still have many significant economic problems before the economy can really begin to grow including the financial system, housing, over-levered consumers, unemployment, states and municipalities in serious deficits and asking the federal government to bail them out (estimates are around $300 billion now) and many more.
Therefore, unless there is a clear change in government policy (by both political parties,) it appears that additional stimulus, low interest rates and excessive printing of money will continue. Since money supply is the initial driver of our economy, the GDP number may stay positive and above water. But, this printing and spending money plus low interest rates will require investors to make significant changes in all asset classes.
Following is my view. This view may differ from yours because my assumption is that the economy and markets do not work, except on a very long-term basis, the way most people think they should.
First, we need to put the real economy (not just the political economy we read about every day) into context so we can distinguish the actual economy from the artificial, centrally planned economy. This makes it possible to see the two economies. Once you understand both, you will be in a position to develop a short-term plan for your business and your investments; and a longer-term plan for when these two economies collide.
Most people think that when the economy (GDP) grows, corporate profits grow which causes stock prices to increase. This is true if you are thinking very long-term. But what really causes the economy to grow is when the government increases the money supply (prints money.)
GDP growth, by definition, is only possible if you increase the money supply. If the money supply did not increase, you would have a fixed number of dollars in the economy. Therefore, increased spending in one area of the economy would cause a decline in another area with net, aggregate growth of zero.
If the definition of economic growth was more wealth, rather than more money, the economy could certainly grow if GDP stays at zero. Think about how technology has increased our wealth over the years at the same time that prices were are being consistently reduced.
However, the problem with increasing the money supply is:
1.It decreases the value of the dollar, reducing buying power, which then causes inflation.
2.It causes malinvestments (investments go into marginally productive ventures that cannot sustain themselves once interest rates rise or when credit or money is withdrawn from the financial system.) It can/does cause bubbles.
3.It reduces the ability of productive companies to obtain the capital they need) long-term) crowding out real productive ventures.
Current fiscal and monetary policy
The Federal Reserve Bank, using a government (Keynesian) periscope, has decided that we are not de-leveraging (bringing prices back to equilibrium); we are instead close to falling into deflation. This Keynesian definition means a chronic slowing of consumer spending or demand. It is not the original or traditional definition of deflation which is a contraction of the money supply.) Therefore, the Fed is expected to soon (maybe in November) begin the second round of quantitative easing (printing money.)
Therefore, to increase consumer demand, the Fed plans to hold interest rates artificially low and pump money into the banking system to incentivise the consumer. This, plus continuous stimulus programs and overspending tax collections have not worked to date. Some of the reasons are:
1.Banks have over $1 trillion in excess reserves but are not lending (for several reasons) so credit expansion is not occurring which is necessary to hype demand
2.We have had over $900 billion in stimulus programs plus $2.7 trillion in “additional” government spending over the past two years. GDP has risen by about $800 billion over the same two-year period.
3.A lot of this money has found its way into emerging countries in the form of investments. Two emerging countries have started to tax foreign investment funds in order to slow down their growth.
Conclusion
Government (fiscal and monetary) policy cannot continue down this same path much longer without it causing horrendous inflation. Our debt and committed future obligations already exceed 100% of current, tax collections for many decades into the future.
Plus, we still have many significant economic problems before the economy can really begin to grow including the financial system, housing, over-levered consumers, unemployment, states and municipalities in serious deficits and asking the federal government to bail them out (estimates are around $300 billion now) and many more.
Therefore, unless there is a clear change in government policy (by both political parties,) it appears that additional stimulus, low interest rates and excessive printing of money will continue. Since money supply is the initial driver of our economy, the GDP number may stay positive and above water. But, this printing and spending money plus low interest rates will require investors to make significant changes in all asset classes.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Should we be worried about future deflation or inflation?
There is a lot of worry these days about weather we are in deflation, slipping into deflation or about to enter into an inflationary environment. It obviously makes a big difference in future planning and how investments are allocated. As you can imagine, there are very different views among the different economic philosophies.
Before I get philosophic differences however, I need to provide a simple definition of inflation and deflation. Very simply, inflation means an increase or inflation of the money supply (more money units) and deflation means a contraction in the money supply. In the case of inflation, an increase in money units means that each unit is worth less or one’s purchasing power is diminished. Therefore prices increase. Inflation, the way the word is used today means an increase in prices. Therefore, the cause of inflation is usually misdiagnosed. I’ll talk more about this in other posts. So lets look at the different viewpoints.
Keynesian/Demand-Side View
The big government economists (Keynesians and demand-side economists) are worried that the money spent to date (the stimulus and fiscal and monetary policy) is not enough to fill the spending gap left when consumers and businesses reduced spending.
Influential economists like Paul Krugman, have said all along that the stimulus packages have not been large enough to fill the gap in spending and that now we need a much bigger stimulus package in the neighborhood of $1 trillion more dollars if we are going to turn this economy around. If we do not get that kind of spending, we will slip into a deflationary death spiral that is very difficult to get out of. Therefore, we could end up like Japan in the 1990’s with 10 years or more of almost no growth.
Their definition of deflation is falling prices (due to lack of demand) and they see falling prices everywhere (housing prices, food prices, car prices, etc.) He doesn’t see falling computer prices over the years as detrimental or deflation however. He also does not mention how we are going to repay the loans.
Keynesian/Supply-Side ViewThe opposite position is taken by the less government economists (Keynesians and supply-side economists) who see a marginal improvement in GDP growth, which they have extrapolated into a V shaped recovery. They are worried about the coming inflation because of artificially low interest rates and high debt levels.
They see inflation (a rising consumer price index or CPI) everywhere. They think that unless the Fed raises interest rates very soon and begins to take money out of the system, we will get severe inflation within the next year to eighteen months. Interest rates should be raised to one percent higher then the nominal growth rate of GDP (growth rate before inflation.) So if the economy is growing at 3-4% as they expect, interest rates should be at 4-5% not zero.
Their definition of inflation is a rising CPI index (which is the symptom of inflation, not the cause.) The CPI index as you know is a basket of goods and services the government uses to measure price changes.
Capitalist ViewThe almost no government economists (Capitalists, Austrians, Objectivists) have a much different definition of deflation and inflation. They see deflation and inflation as it was originally defined: expansion or contraction of the money supply. Their view is that the government has been and continues to pump money into the economy (print money), which will be inflationary. However, consumers are currently over-leveraged (too much credit vs. disposable income) and must reduce spending and increase savings in order to b ring their financial lives into balance. This slowdown in spending looks like deflation (prices are being reduced by almost every store advertising.)
Therefore we are currently in a period of de-leveraging, not deflation and until the consumer starts spending again (by using or reducing his savings or expanding his credit) we will not enter an inflationary phase. But based on the money that has been added and expected to be added to the economy, we could be in for serious inflation.
Conclusion
Therefore, your current position should be focused on a de-levering economy, which will take considerable time and considerable pain. However, if the government pumps too much money into the economy (a debatable number) or credit becomes too easy again, too soon, it will be time to reposition yourself for inflation.
Before I get philosophic differences however, I need to provide a simple definition of inflation and deflation. Very simply, inflation means an increase or inflation of the money supply (more money units) and deflation means a contraction in the money supply. In the case of inflation, an increase in money units means that each unit is worth less or one’s purchasing power is diminished. Therefore prices increase. Inflation, the way the word is used today means an increase in prices. Therefore, the cause of inflation is usually misdiagnosed. I’ll talk more about this in other posts. So lets look at the different viewpoints.
Keynesian/Demand-Side View
The big government economists (Keynesians and demand-side economists) are worried that the money spent to date (the stimulus and fiscal and monetary policy) is not enough to fill the spending gap left when consumers and businesses reduced spending.
Influential economists like Paul Krugman, have said all along that the stimulus packages have not been large enough to fill the gap in spending and that now we need a much bigger stimulus package in the neighborhood of $1 trillion more dollars if we are going to turn this economy around. If we do not get that kind of spending, we will slip into a deflationary death spiral that is very difficult to get out of. Therefore, we could end up like Japan in the 1990’s with 10 years or more of almost no growth.
Their definition of deflation is falling prices (due to lack of demand) and they see falling prices everywhere (housing prices, food prices, car prices, etc.) He doesn’t see falling computer prices over the years as detrimental or deflation however. He also does not mention how we are going to repay the loans.
Keynesian/Supply-Side ViewThe opposite position is taken by the less government economists (Keynesians and supply-side economists) who see a marginal improvement in GDP growth, which they have extrapolated into a V shaped recovery. They are worried about the coming inflation because of artificially low interest rates and high debt levels.
They see inflation (a rising consumer price index or CPI) everywhere. They think that unless the Fed raises interest rates very soon and begins to take money out of the system, we will get severe inflation within the next year to eighteen months. Interest rates should be raised to one percent higher then the nominal growth rate of GDP (growth rate before inflation.) So if the economy is growing at 3-4% as they expect, interest rates should be at 4-5% not zero.
Their definition of inflation is a rising CPI index (which is the symptom of inflation, not the cause.) The CPI index as you know is a basket of goods and services the government uses to measure price changes.
Capitalist ViewThe almost no government economists (Capitalists, Austrians, Objectivists) have a much different definition of deflation and inflation. They see deflation and inflation as it was originally defined: expansion or contraction of the money supply. Their view is that the government has been and continues to pump money into the economy (print money), which will be inflationary. However, consumers are currently over-leveraged (too much credit vs. disposable income) and must reduce spending and increase savings in order to b ring their financial lives into balance. This slowdown in spending looks like deflation (prices are being reduced by almost every store advertising.)
Therefore we are currently in a period of de-leveraging, not deflation and until the consumer starts spending again (by using or reducing his savings or expanding his credit) we will not enter an inflationary phase. But based on the money that has been added and expected to be added to the economy, we could be in for serious inflation.
Conclusion
Therefore, your current position should be focused on a de-levering economy, which will take considerable time and considerable pain. However, if the government pumps too much money into the economy (a debatable number) or credit becomes too easy again, too soon, it will be time to reposition yourself for inflation.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
What is going on with the market?
As you know, I understand that stimulus money drives up the GDP numbers making it look like the economy is getting better, but I have been very concerned about 2010 because of many impending headwinds:
1. Mortgage delinquencies about to rise significantly. Note, we are now entering the 2005-07 period when the option-ARM’s made up the majority of mortgages (pay what you want to per month and we will add the unpaid balance of principal and interest due to your mortgage)
2. Banks will have to report, for the first time, off balance sheet assets in their first quarter reports,
3. Unemployment is high and probably getting worse (except for government census workers),
4. Mortgage resets have started to rise and with about 25% of homes underwater, there may be no way for most people to refinance,
5. Home inventories are high (over nine months supply at the current sales pace) plus significant shadow inventory (from banks and home owners) is waiting to come on the market when times improve,
6. Current taxes and fees are poised to increase significantly and new forms of taxes (like a national sales tax) may be required to fund our unsustainable spending,
7. State (and local) budgets are in trouble (estimates are from a $200 to $300 billion deficit) and Governors are asking for more help from the Federal Government (who has no money), and
8. Consumers still very over-leveraged.
That’s enough. I am not trying to get you depressed; I just wanted to make a point.
I am trying to understand why the market continues to rise and why traders are apparently throwing risk out the window again. Bears are down to a low 21%. Then I learned about Richard Russell’s latest newsletter. He publishes the DOW Theory Newsletter and is one of the most respected market analysts anywhere. Plus, almost “everyone” buys his newsletter including Goldman, hedge funds, the Bank of China, etc. In his latest newsletter, he explains that he expected the market to close below a critical number (10,750) last Friday which would have turned the market negative. However, during the final six minutes of trading, volume suddenly surged and lifted the DOW above the critical level of 10,750. This was very unusual and caused him to ask:
“Where did that very late buying come from? I have to think this was one of the most flagrant cases of manipulation that I have every seen. Was it the Fed; was it Goldman or Morgan Stanley buying futures on orders from the Fed?”
Note: he is not enamored with the Fed to begin with. But, it got me thinking.
Fiscal and monetary policy is being run by Keynesians (and has been since FDR.) Keynesians believe that in a crisis, you quickly lower rates, print money and then stimulate the economy to fill the drop or gap in spending. If you stimulate enough, the economy (GDP) will “climb” and soon consumers will believe the economy is coming back and will start growing again. The return of the consumer completes the circle and allows the government to hand off the economy, once again, to the private sector.
Now to complete this conspiracy theory, imagine the Fed and the Treasury sitting around wondering how they are going to get the economy going again when “the demand-side” or consumer is over leveraged and can’t buy or borrow money and the banks can’t lend because of impending asset losses and the capital asset requirements needed to remain solvent.
I am not a conspiracy theorist by nature, but I am having a difficult time understanding this market and continue to search for answers.
1. Mortgage delinquencies about to rise significantly. Note, we are now entering the 2005-07 period when the option-ARM’s made up the majority of mortgages (pay what you want to per month and we will add the unpaid balance of principal and interest due to your mortgage)
2. Banks will have to report, for the first time, off balance sheet assets in their first quarter reports,
3. Unemployment is high and probably getting worse (except for government census workers),
4. Mortgage resets have started to rise and with about 25% of homes underwater, there may be no way for most people to refinance,
5. Home inventories are high (over nine months supply at the current sales pace) plus significant shadow inventory (from banks and home owners) is waiting to come on the market when times improve,
6. Current taxes and fees are poised to increase significantly and new forms of taxes (like a national sales tax) may be required to fund our unsustainable spending,
7. State (and local) budgets are in trouble (estimates are from a $200 to $300 billion deficit) and Governors are asking for more help from the Federal Government (who has no money), and
8. Consumers still very over-leveraged.
That’s enough. I am not trying to get you depressed; I just wanted to make a point.
I am trying to understand why the market continues to rise and why traders are apparently throwing risk out the window again. Bears are down to a low 21%. Then I learned about Richard Russell’s latest newsletter. He publishes the DOW Theory Newsletter and is one of the most respected market analysts anywhere. Plus, almost “everyone” buys his newsletter including Goldman, hedge funds, the Bank of China, etc. In his latest newsletter, he explains that he expected the market to close below a critical number (10,750) last Friday which would have turned the market negative. However, during the final six minutes of trading, volume suddenly surged and lifted the DOW above the critical level of 10,750. This was very unusual and caused him to ask:
“Where did that very late buying come from? I have to think this was one of the most flagrant cases of manipulation that I have every seen. Was it the Fed; was it Goldman or Morgan Stanley buying futures on orders from the Fed?”
Note: he is not enamored with the Fed to begin with. But, it got me thinking.
Fiscal and monetary policy is being run by Keynesians (and has been since FDR.) Keynesians believe that in a crisis, you quickly lower rates, print money and then stimulate the economy to fill the drop or gap in spending. If you stimulate enough, the economy (GDP) will “climb” and soon consumers will believe the economy is coming back and will start growing again. The return of the consumer completes the circle and allows the government to hand off the economy, once again, to the private sector.
Now to complete this conspiracy theory, imagine the Fed and the Treasury sitting around wondering how they are going to get the economy going again when “the demand-side” or consumer is over leveraged and can’t buy or borrow money and the banks can’t lend because of impending asset losses and the capital asset requirements needed to remain solvent.
I am not a conspiracy theorist by nature, but I am having a difficult time understanding this market and continue to search for answers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)