Home » Posts tagged 'gdp' (Page 22)
Tag Archives: gdp
Stocks and Bonds Are Due for a Generational Crash of 75%
Stocks and Bonds Are Due for a Generational Crash of 75%
From the point of view of history, a reversion to generational lows is inevitable, and a valuation level around 50% of GDP for stocks is a fair target.
If we look back to 1981 valuations of stocks and bonds as a guide to valuations at the next generational low, we find stocks and bonds are due for a 75% drop. The Great Bull market in bonds and equities took off after 1981, and has run higher for 34 years (notwithstanding a spot of bother in 2000-02 and 2008-09).
Before credit bubbles became the New Normal, the stock market was valued at less than 50% of GDP. Now stocks are valued at over 200% of GDP, as are bonds. Together, the total securities valuation is over 400% of GDP:
Data courtesy of Doug Noland
Bonds would have to experience a similar decline to reach pre-credit-bubble levels.The GDP (gross domestic product) of the U.S. was around $17 trillion in 2014. If valuations returned to pre-bubble levels of 50% of GDP, stocks would have to drop from $36 trillion to around $8 trillion–a decline of 75%.
A drop back to the rich valuations of 100% of GDP would require a decline of 50% from current levels. In other words, the S&P 500 would be around 1,000, not 2,000.
To provide some context for the extreme valuations of present -day stocks and bonds, I have shown what the stock and bond markets would be worth in current dollars if they had simply tracked inflation since 1981. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator, $1 in 1981 is now worth $2.60 in 2014 dollars.
If stocks had risen only with official inflation, the S&P 500 would be worth 10% of its current valuation: $3.6 trillion versus $36 trillion.
The bond market (Treasury, corporate and Municipal bonds and agency securities) would be worth 15% of the bond market’s current valuations.
The Debt To GDP Ratio For The Entire World: 286 Percent
The Debt To GDP Ratio For The Entire World: 286 Percent
Did you know that there is more than $28,000 of debt for every man, woman and child on the entire planet? And since close to 3 billion of those people survive on less than 2 dollars a day, your share of that debt is going to be much larger than that. If we tookeverything that the global economy produced this year and everything that the global economy produced next year and used it to pay all of this debt, it still would not be enough. According to a recent report put out by the McKinsey Global Institute entitled “Debt and (not much) deleveraging“, the total amount of debt on our planet has grown from 142 trillion dollars at the end of 2007 to 199 trillion dollars today. This is the largest mountain of debt in the history of the world, and those numbers mean that we are in substantially worse condition than we were just prior to the last financial crisis.
When it comes to debt, a lot of fingers get pointed at the United States, and rightly so. Just prior to the last recession, the U.S. national debt was sitting at about 9 trillion dollars. Today, it has crossed the 18 trillion dollar mark. But of course the U.S. is not the only one that is guilty. In fact, the McKinsey Global Institute says that debt levels have grown in all major economies since 2007. The following is an excerpt from the report…
Seven years after the bursting of a global credit bubble resulted in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, debt continues to grow. In fact, rather than reducing indebtedness, or deleveraging, all major economies today have higher levels of borrowing relative to GDP than they did in 2007. Global debt in these years has grown by $57 trillion, raising the ratio of debt to GDP by 17 percentage points (Exhibit 1). That poses new risks to financial stability and may undermine global economic growth.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Preempting a Misleading Argument: Why Environmental Problems Will Stop Tracking with GDP
Preempting a Misleading Argument: Why Environmental Problems Will Stop Tracking with GDP
I hate to say I told you so, and could be too dead to do so, so I’ll tell you in advance: One decade soon, environmental problems will stop tracking with GDP.
But the reasons? Well, they probably aren’t what you think, especially if you’ve been drinking the green Kool-Aid.
For decades, big-picture ecologists and eventually the “ecological economists” pointed out the fundamental conflict between economic growth and environmental protection. Every tick of GDP came with the tock of habitat loss, pollution, and, as we gradually realized, climate change. A growing GDP requires a growing human population or a growing amount of goods and services per person. In the American experience of the 20th century, it was easy to see both – population and per capita consumption – spiraling upward, and just as easy to see the environmental impacts reverberating outward. Much of the world saw the same, although in some countries GDP growth was driven almost entirely by population growth.
Unfortunately, a lot of time was spent overcoming fallacious but slick-sounding shibboleths like “green growth,” “dematerializing” the economy, and the “environmental Kuznets curve.” It seemed these were – or easily could have been –designed by advertisers on Madison Avenue, Big Money in general, or economists in their service, to prevent consumers and policy makers from responding rationally to environmental deterioration. Suggestive phrases such as “consumer confidence” spurred the consumer along, buying more stuff to increase the profits of corporations and, in turn, the campaign purses of politicians.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
US Economy Collapses Again
US Economy Collapses Again
In 2011, the U.S. economy collapsed to 0.1 percent in terms of annual growth rate. At the end of 2012, to a mere 0.2 percent initial decline. In early 2014, it actually declined by -2.2 percent.
And now in 2015, it is essentially flat once again at 0.2 percent. The numbers are actually even worse, if one discounts the redefinitions of GDP that were made by the US in 2013, counting new categories as contributing to growth, like R&D spending, that for decades were not considered contributors to growth – in effect creating economic growth by statistical manipulation. Those highly questionable 2013 definitional additions to growth added around US$500 billion a year to U.S. growth estimates, or about 0.3 percent of U.S. GDP. Back those redefinitions out, and the U.S. experienced negative GDP four times in the last four years. We get -0.2 percent in 2011, 0 percent in 2012, -2.5 percent in 2014 and -0.1 percent earlier this year.
It is therefore arguable that the U.S. has also experienced at least one mild ‘double dip’ recession, and perhaps two, since 2010.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Energy prices and consumer spending
Energy prices and consumer spending
Among the disappointments in the 2015:Q1 GDP figures was weak consumption growth, which was a little surprising given the extra cash most consumers have on hand as a result of lower energy prices. I wanted to take a look at how the recent consumer behavior compares with what we’ve seen historically.
The graph below plots the price of energy goods and services relative to the overall price consumers pay for other purchases. Real energy prices have fallen about 20% from where they had been last summer.
Many consumers buy the same number of gallons of gasoline each week regardless of whether the price goes up or down. Such behavior would mean that someone who used to spend 5% of their budget on energy would only need to spend about 4% if energy prices fell 20%. And indeed we see in the data that purchases of energy goods and services now account for only 4.4% of total consumer spending, down from 5.6% a year ago.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
The Goldilocks Illusion
The Goldilocks Illusion
Why Market Participants Liked the Payrolls Report
Some people have wondered why the stock market reacted with such a big rally to last Friday’s payrolls data. After all, the report wasn’t much to write home about, especially if one ponders the details. In addition, the already weak March payrolls data were revised lower to an even worse figure.
However, the report certainly did one thing: it kept the “Goldilocks illusion” alive. While jobs data are a lagging economic indicator and would likely be completely ignored in an unhampered free market (if anyone even took the trouble to collect them, that is), they are regarded as decisive for Fed policy. Few things illustrate more vividly that the central planners are driving forward with their eyes firmly fixed on the rear-view mirror.
The Fed has little choice though, since its mandate explicitly includes employment as one the things central bank policy is supposed to support (which it does mainly by fostering artificial booms and malinvestment of capital). The market’s focus on the jobs data has increased greatly in recent years as a result of this, which incidentally illustrates how utterly dependent the markets have become on a continuation of easy money policies by central banks.
The “Goldilocks” idea is that it is best for risk assets if economic data are strong enough not to signal recessionary conditions, but weak enough to keep ZIRP and monetary pumping going. Friday’s data point was presumably considered almost perfect in terms of this playbook.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Economic Disinformation Keeps Financial Markets Up
Economic Disinformation Keeps Financial Markets Up
Today’s payroll jobs report is more of the same. The Bureau of Labor Statistics claims that 223,000 new jobs were created in April. Let’s accept the claim and see where the jobs are.
Specialty trade contractors are credited with 41,000 jobs equally split between residential and nonresidential. I believe these are home and building repairs and remodeling.
The rest of the jobs, 182,000, are in domestic services.
Despite store closings and weak retail sales, 12,000 people were hired in retail trade.
Despite negative first quarter GDP growth, 62,000 people were hired in professional and business services, 67% of which are in administrative and waste services.
Health care and social assistance accounted for 55,600 jobs of which ambulatory health care services, hospitals, and social assistance accounted for 85% of the jobs.
Waitresses and bartenders account for 26,000 jobs, and government employed 10,000 new workers.
There are no jobs in manufacturing.
Mining, timber, oil and gas extraction lost jobs.
Temporary help services (16,100 jobs) offered 3.7 times more jobs than law, accounting architecture, and engineering combined (4,500 jobs).
As I have pointed out for a number of years, according to the payroll jobs reports, the complexion of the US labor force is that of a Third World country. Most of the jobs created are lowly paid domestic services.
The well paying high productivity, high value-added jobs have been offshored and given to foreigners who work for less. This fact, more than the reduction in marginal income tax rates, is the reason for the rising inequality in the distribution of income and wealth.
Offshoring middle class jobs raises corporate profits and, thereby, the incomes of corporate owners (shareholders) and executives. But it reduces the incomes of the majority of the population who are forced into either lowly paid and part time jobs or unemployment.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
The Embarrassment of Transparency
The Embarrassment of Transparency
Over the past decade or so, “transparency” has become one of the buzzwords that has guided the Federal Reserve’s culture. The word was meant to convey the belief that central banking was best done for all to see in the full light of day, not in the murky back rooms of Washington and New York. The Fed seems to be on a mission to prove that its operations are benevolent, fair, predictable, and equitable. Part of that transparency movement took shape in 2007 when the Fed began publicizing its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) forecasts, which previously (to the frustration of investors) had been kept under wraps. Most of the Fed’s policy moves are tied to how strong, or how weak, it believes the economy will be in the coming year. As a result, its GDP forecast is perhaps the single most important estimate it makes.
So the good news for investors is that the Fed now tells us where it thinks the economy is headed. The bad news is it has been consistently, and sometimes spectacularly, wrong. Talk about the blind leading the blind.
In the eight years that the Fed has issued GDP forecasts in the prior Fall, only once, in 2010, did the actual economic performance come in the range of its expectations (referred to as its “central tendency.”) And even in that year, Fed forecasters did not manage to put the ball through the goal posts. Instead it just hit the upright (the low end of its range: 2.5% in actual growth vs. a central tendency of 2.5% to 3.5%). In all other years the Fed missed the mark completely on the downside. The tale of the tape tells the story:
Central Tendency (The Fed) Actual Growth (BEA)
2007 2.4% – 2.5% 1.8%
2008 1.8% – 2.5 % -0.30%
2009 -0.2% – 1.1% -2.80%
2010 2.5 % – 3.5 % 2.50%
2011 3.0% – 3.6% 1.60%
2012 2.5% – 2.9% 2.30%
2013 2.3% – 3.0% 2.20%
2014 2.8% – 3.2% 2.40%
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Why We Have an Oversupply of Almost Everything (Oil, labor, capital, etc.)
Why We Have an Oversupply of Almost Everything (Oil, labor, capital, etc.)
The Wall Street Journal recently ran an article called, Glut of Capital and Labor Challenge Policy Makers: Global oversupply extends beyond commodities, elevating deflation risk. To me, this is a very serious issue, quite likely signaling that we are reaching what has been called Limits to Growth, a situation modeled in 1972 in a book by that name.
What happens is that economic growth eventually runs into limits. Many people have assumed that these limits would be marked by high prices and excessive demand for goods. In my view, the issue is precisely the opposite one: Limits to growth are instead marked by low prices and inadequate demand. Common workers can no longer afford to buy the goods and services that the economy produces, because of inadequate wage growth. The price of all commodities drops, because of lower demand by workers. Furthermore, investors can no longer find investments that provide an adequate return on capital, because prices for finished goods are pulled down by the low demand of workers with inadequate wages.
Evidence Regarding the Connection Between Energy Consumption and GDP Growth
We can see the close connection between world energy consumption and world GDP using historical data.
This chart gives a clue regarding what is wrong with the economy. The slope of the line implies that adding one percentage point of growth in energy usage tends to add less and less GDP growth over time, as I have shown in Figure 2. This means that if we want to have, for example, a constant 4% growth in world GDP for the period 1969 to 2013, we would need to gradually increase the rate of growth in energy consumption from about 1.8% = (4.0% – 2.2%) growth in energy consumption in 1969 to 2.8% = (4.0% – 1.2%) growth in energy consumption in 2013.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Sucking Spoilt Milk From A Bloated Dead Sow
Sucking Spoilt Milk From A Bloated Dead Sow
With US GDP growth ‘officially’ back where it belongs, in the Arctic zone close to freezing on the surface but much worse in real life, for reasons both Albert Edwards and Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (not exactly a pair of Siamese twins) remarked this week; that is, excluding the “biggest inventory build in history, the economy contracted sharply”, it’s time for everyone to at long last change the angle from which they view the world, if not the color of their glasses.
But ‘everyone’ will resist, refuse and refute that change, leaving precious few people with an accurate picture of the – economic – world. Still, for you it’s beneficial to acknowledge that very little of what you read holds much, if any, truth or value. This is true when it comes to politics, geopolitics and economics. That is, the US is not a democracy, it is not the supreme leader of the world, and the American economy is not in recovery.
Declining business investment, a record inventory build and extreme borrowing to hold share prices above water through buybacks, it all together paints a picture of a very unhealthy if not outright dying economy, and certainly not one in which anything at all is recovering. But how are you supposed to know?
The entire financial media should change its angle of view, away from the recovery meme (or myth), but the media won’t because the absurd one-dimensional focus on that perpetuated myth is the only thing that makes the present mess somewhat bearable, palatable and, more importantly, marketable, to the general public.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
We Just Broke 2008′s Record for the Fastest Economic Unraveling!
We Just Broke 2008′s Record for the Fastest Economic Unraveling!
In my last piece I provided a technical analysis that signaled we are entering the first stage of a bursting bubble that we’ll call the Fed Bubble. Now while I do believe technicals provide good insight to the economic landscape I see them as a necessary rather sufficient qualifier. In order to be truly confident that our technicals are providing an accurate story we need to understand the fundamentals behind the charts, as we often find the engine light comes on due to a loose wire rather than a problem with the engine.
The final Q1 GDP revision was just released and we saw that GDP has again missed expectations by such a large margin that 2015 is another write off for a 3% growth year. Almost comically we heard the same excuses we got last year. “Weather was wintery and next year is going to be the turnaround year”. So in order to explain to these supposed economic and market ‘experts’ who seem wholly incapable of understanding economic and market forces with any sense of accuracy, let’s run through a few fundamentals.
I want to hone in on the category of consumer spending that is first to go away so that we may capture the first signals of a consumer spending pull back. A good proxy for this is the Johnson Redbook Chain Store yoy sales. This captures the consumer spending taking place at large department stores (Macy’s, Kohls, Walmart, Kmart, etc). This is going to be where the real discretionary retail spending takes place, as in do I have enough space on my credit card for that sassy blue dress and groceries or just groceries? And don’t think that is just a theatrical example. I remember the days of asking myself those very same questions (ok maybe not the blue dress but you get the idea). That is just real life here in the US (and Canada for that matter).
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
US Economic Output – “Ugly, but Fleeting”?
US Economic Output – “Ugly, but Fleeting”?
On the Uselessness of Aggregate Economic Statistics
We actually hate talking about GDP. It mainly measures consumption and leaves out the bulk of the economy’s production structure – which has led to the completely erroneous, but often repeated notion that “the consumer represents 70% of economic activity”. In reality, consumption represents somewhere between 35% and 40% of all economic activity. The manufacturing sector is actually not the “smallest sector of the economy”. It is stillthe by far largest sector in terms of total output.
Moreover, “GDP growth” is really not informative with respect to whether or not the activity measured is profitable and therefore indicating that wealth is created. Given that government consumption is a major component of GDP, there is obviously a lot of wasteful spending that is counted as “growth”.
Furthermore, in a bubble era, when credit expansion ex nihilo is running wild, a lot of investment in fixed assets will eventually be discovered to have been malinvestment. Such spending is also added to “growth” while it occurs, but in reality, it is just a waste of scarce capital. Simply put, there isn’t much worth measuring, because the truly important things cannot really be measured anyway. Even so, it makes a lot more sense to occasionally look at the gross output tables per industry rather than GDP.
Now let us think for a moment about Wednesday’s quarterly GDP report. What does it even mean that the economy has allegedly grown by “0.2%”? This strikes us as a completely absurd number. Given that it actually represents quarterly growth annualized, it means that “real growth” last quarter was 0.05%. Really? Someone has measured the economic output of the entire country and found out it grew by 5 basis points? This sounds like a tiny fraction of the margin for error rather than a meaningful number.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
The Dwindling US Economy
The Dwindling US Economy
The announcement today (April 29) of a barely positive GDP first quarter 2015 growth rate of 0.2 percent (two-tenths of one percent) is an intentional exaggeration.
Today’s GDP report is the “advance estimate.” There will be two revisions, with the first occurring in one month on May 29.
Although the “consensus estimate,” which is Wall Street’s estimate, declined dramatically over the past month, the consensus estimate was for 1.0 percent.
The BEA’s advance estimate bears the burden of impact on financial markets even though it is the least reliable estimate. Subsequent revisions receive much less attention. Because of its market impact, the advance estimate is fudged by the Bureau of Economic Affairs (BEA) in order not to upset financial markets keyed to the consensus forecast.
All indications are that the first quarter experienced negative GDP growth, that is, a decline from the previous quarter. However, if BEA reported a negative GDP when the financial markets were relying on positive real growth, the government’s Plunge Protection Team might be unable to prevent a substantial market decline.
Therefore, the BEA in its advance estimate reported a barely positive result that kept GDP out of negative territory. This gives financial markets a month to undergo an orderly reduction prior to the first and then second revisions of the advance estimate, or simply to forget the poor performance altogether until the second quarter advance estimate.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
16 Signs That The Economy Has Stalled Out And The Next Economic Downturn Is Here
16 Signs That The Economy Has Stalled Out And The Next Economic Downturn Is Here
If U.S. economic growth falls any lower, we are officially going to be in recession territory. On Wednesday, we learned that U.S. GDP grew at a 0.2 percent annual rate in the first quarter of 2015. That was much lower than all of the “experts” were projecting. And of course there are all sorts of questions whether the GDP numbers the government feeds us are legitimate anyway. According to John Williams of shadowstats.com, if honest numbers were used they would show that U.S. GDP growth has been continuously negative since 2005. But even if we consider the number that the government has given us to be the “real” number, it still shows that the U.S. economy has stalled out. It is almost as if we have hit a “turning point”, and there are many out there (including myself) that believe that the next major economic downturn is dead ahead. As you will see in this article, a whole bunch of things are happening right now that we would expect to see if a recession was beginning. The following are 16 signs that the economy has stalled out and the next economic downturn is here…
#1 We just learned that U.S. GDP grew at an anemic 0.2 percent annual rate during the first quarter of 2015…
The gross domestic product grew between January and March at an annualized rate of 0.2 percent, the U.S. Commerce Department said, adding to the picture of an economy braking sharply after accelerating for much of last year. The pace fell well shy of the 1 percent mark anticipated by analysts and marked the weakest quarter in a year.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Fitch Downgrades Japan To A From A+
Fitch Downgrades Japan To A From A+
With the USDJPY’s ascent to 125, 150 and higher having seemingly stalled just under 120, with concerns that the BOJ may not monetize more than 100% of its net debt issuance suddenly surfacing, the BOJ and the Nikkei would take any help they could get. They got just that an hour ago when Fitch downgraded Japan’s credit rating from A+ to A, citing lack of sufficient structural fiscal measures in FY15 budget to replace deferred consumption tax increase.
But don’t panic, Fitch says: it expects Japan’s gross debt to GDP ratio to “stabilize around 250% of GDP in 2020.” Perhaps the fact that Fitch did not predict the complete collapse of the Japanese economy is why the USDJPY spiked then promptly reversed and is trading almost unchanged, the same as Nikkei futures.
See, if Fitch had predicted a stabilization level of 2,500%, then Japanese stocks would be limit up today. Because remember: in the New Normal, only a completely socio-economic collapse and terminal currency devaluation leads to limit up in regional stock markets.
As to what really prompted the downgrade, which the BOJ was hoping would lead to a far more negative reaction for the JPY, here it is:
Full Fitch note:
Fitch Ratings-Hong Kong-27 April 2015: Fitch Ratings has downgraded Japan’s Long-Term Foreign and Local Currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs) to ‘A’ from ‘A+’.
- The issue ratings on Japan’s senior unsecured foreign and local currency bonds are also downgraded to ‘A’ from ‘A+’.
- The Outlooks on the Long-Term IDRs are Stable.
- The Country Ceiling is downgraded to ‘AA’ from ‘AA+’ and the Short-Term Foreign Currency IDR is downgraded to ‘F1’ from ‘F1+’.
KEY RATING DRIVERS
The downgrade of Japan’s IDRs reflects the following key rating drivers:-
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
