Ordinarily I’d simply post a link to a media report in either my Gems or Brickbats page. But this quote from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer shows that he really understands what is going on now, in a way that no other person in authority seems to have done as yet. The full report can be found at:
Microsoft resorts to first layoffs, cutting 5,000
Ballmer’s perceptive analysis of what is going on is:
“We’re certainly in the midst of a once-in-a-lifetime set of economic conditions. The perspective I would bring is not one of recession. Rather, the economy is resetting to lower level of business and consumer spending based largely on the reduced leverage in economy,” said Chief Executive Steve Ballmer during a conference call. For consumers, that may mean less discretionary income to spend on a second or third home computer, he said.
Bravo. That is precisely what is happening. It is also why, though government action might slow down the decline, ultimately it can’t prevent a serious decline in economic activity. That can happen only gradually as we slowly replace debt-generated spending capacity with income-generated capacity. What the government can do is remove the logjam standing in the way of that process, which is the crippling mountain of debt accumulated by the Ponzi financing behaviour of the last 4 decades (and in particular the last one). But that will require much more drastic action than simply bailouts: given the scale of debt accumulated, either the debt has to be devalued by inflation, or written down via government decree.
We’re still a long way from any government official or politician realising that. But the fact that someone as influential as Ballmer has put his finger on the problem implies that maybe that day of realisation is approaching.






January 23rd, 2009 at 8:32 am
I am someone keenly interested in economics, with no education in the subject, and I enjoy this blog enormously. Your comment above, ‘written down via government decree’ got me thinking and I would like to ask a question..
If the US were to negotiate a decoupling between oil pricing and US dollars, what would be the result on US inflation or deflation, if any?
It occurred to me that the demand for US dollars is somehow related to its reserve currency status, and that status is to some extent related to its connection with oil. If this connection were removed presumably this would result in a comparatively greater demand for domestic produce within the USA, stimulating the domestic economy. Would it also reduce the trade imbalances, that ultimately supplies the incentive for cheap credit to be extended in the first place?
January 23rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
This is indeed an insightful comment from a phenomenally successful businessman. I can’t help wondering about his motives, given that the truth usually takes second place to “what’s good for Microsoft”. However, I congratulate him on expressing this view and hope that some of our businessmen, politicians (and even economists) will soon see the light.
January 23rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Steve,
What do you think would have been the best way to use that $10 billion that KRUDD handed out?
Was it good the way it was spent?
As you say, we need to focus on income generating investment, and paying off credit card debts (or any debts)with that money won’t solve the problem will it?
Would it have been better not to have touched that money at all and kept it to invest in whatever income generating scheme Aussies would be good at?
January 23rd, 2009 at 2:26 pm
And along with that worldwide GDP reset, as you have so clearly articulated on this blog Steve, we will see huge swathes of jobs go that were dependant on debt fuelled spending, jobs located either in Australia or overseas. Jobs that support mortgages.This isnt such a brave call, many postcodes are registering 20% declines already;
“Brisbane house prices could face a fall of up to 15 per cent this year, according to a Gold Coast based property analyst.
Midwood Report author Bill Morris said the average price of homes in Brisbane had already fallen 5 per cent in the six months to December 2008.
He said this “unprecedented decline” in house prices was worrying and the biggest fall recorded since 1980.
Mr Morris said house sale numbers had also plummeted by 36 per cent in the same period.
He said the sales numbers of 4242 were the lowest for any six-month period since 1980.
Mr Morris’s views are in contrast to many other commentators who say population growth and a collapse of new home construction will underpin demand and stop dramatic price falls”
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,27574,24949022-3102,00.html
The collapse in the Chinese economy I was commenting on last and earlier this week has now been outted in public view. It will get far worse. And no ammount of spending by KRudd will fill the hole left behind by the retrenching of Chinese orders to Australia.
The huge US economy is resetting as Ballmer indicates. Gone will debt/credit fuelled discretionary spending- saving is the new black in the US. The same is occurring in all developed economies.
The real danger to Australia here is what will be Krudd’s response? If he decides to send Australia finances deep into the red (as other nations seem hell bent on doing) in a futile effort to counter these forces with deficit spending, Australia will suffer much more arduous circumstances than would be the case otherwise. This is THE big test for KRudd.
January 23rd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
I am looking at the economic fact sheet for Australia 2007/08 http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/fs/aust.pdf
with 2 observations:
1: Number one export country is listed as Japan with 18.9% followed by China with 14.1%. I realise things might be different for 2008 but I am sure Japan is still a SIGNIFICANT enough export country to matter for Australia. I don’t see the effects of Japan’s demise on Australia much mentioned in the news. Why would that be the case???
2. The trade deficit / current account balance for Australia in 2008 was 4.9% of GDP, down from around 6.4 the year before. The trade deficit for the USA is 4.6% of GDP. So we’re not looking better than the USA in that regard. http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/fs/aust.pdf.
Kevin hails our banks as being much better regulated and managed (8% reserve requirement???). Apparently, if you want to be anywhere during a world recession it would be here in OZ. Banks around the world are going under while ours stand solid and proud.
The ASX just went down 101 points to 3385.8.
We’re so freaking doomed.
(borrowed line from the mogambo guru).
I really wish our govt would just let those banks and all the other corporations / industries go broke and let something new & better rise from the debris. We’ll have a crisis sooner and later, better sooner than later.
Hey, we’ve got honey bees, chickens and an ever growing veggie garden. I think about storing some diesel and food supplies for say, 3-5 months. Maybe goats would be a good idea too.
The only question for me is how will I pay our mortgate (our only debt) when the interest hits double digits and/or my job goes? I Better get back to work now…
January 23rd, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Am i mad to think that the average small weatherboard home in inner Melbourne should go for $150,000 to $200,000 max?
January 23rd, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Hi Steve and ‘al49er’, In absorbing the fact that ‘debt’ will need to wash away from the economy, what does our (and the west) future gdp growth rates look like? especially with our long gone manufacturing industries offshore? surely we must be looking at some very slender growth for many years. If as ‘al49er’ describes we are all in for a leaner time “socially” (less debt)the consumption ramifications (oz ‘consumption’ 65% of gdp)must be large.
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Thanks ‘bullturnedbear’for the very helpful definitions on derivatives which I have committed to file together those from ‘MACCA’,
‘tommyt’ and of course Steve.
Also knew ‘prudentsaver’would come back with some insightful comments.
Those people who are talking about making changes in their lives, saving, being more thrifty and considerate in their spending etc seem to be the sort of people that are more naturally “savvy” (not Spivvy, ‘tommyt’)
and “streetwise”, can ‘sniff the wind’ and make the necessary adjustments for their own well-being and survival.
I am not too confident that the required broader sociological changes will occur quite so easily.
Their is still that massive if not majority group who ‘haven’t got a clue’ and who will become very very shocked and distressed when things really begin to bite.
We tend to acknowledge those who are easily recognised as socially disadvantaged but are genuine and triers. But we don’t give as much attention to those with a more natural
penchant toward socially irresponsible or criminal behaviour and I expect this group will become very problematical in Australia and throughout the world. I think reports indicate that things are getting a bit stirred up in China but I think from reports they seem to face a different set of issues including guest workers etc.
I also believe that the climate caused by the
GFC will be fertile ground for unexpected leftfield incidents with the potential to exacerbate the situation in ways we might not yet even imagine.
As ‘bulturnedbear’ intimated, it is a terrific discourse with many insightful contributions,
links and perspectives to keep us all ‘connected’ whilst awaiting Steve’s successive instalments.
thank you all.
January 23rd, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Hi Steve,
Congratulations on a great site – made even better by the quality of input by contributors like bullturnedbear. I have been reading this blog for almost a year and it has helped prevent me from making some large financial mistakes – many thanks.
Steve Ballmer is likely to be followed by many others in business and the main stream media in the near future in “outing” the true nature of the economic and financial mess we are now in. Politicians and financial planners are likely to be the last in line.
This article from “Financial Sense” (although I do not agree with all conclusions) is very interesting in its identification of the true problem and refers to Minsky and the “Austrians” in its assertion that our current capitalist system is on the verge of failure.
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/schoon/2009/0121.html
I am a lot more optimistic – IMHO for a best case scenario we are likely to experience a small Depression (we have moved past Recession scenarios) or (if world governments continue to ignore the root problem) a severe Depression.
I have spent the past 30 years in economic and financial stats and policy areas of government and Steve’s comments on suggestions that he should be involved now in developing the solutions are (unfortunately) spot on. Steve is more likely to be invited to help well after the mess has covered the walls and is a lot harder to clean up.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:01 am
Steve ,I’m wondering what’s your take on the recent trend with debt downgrades within the EU. Countries like Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal, Ireland are having their national debt downgraded, and the yield on their 10 year notes are going up, it’s worst in Greece. Even France are displaying the same trend, although they are still AAA.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=GFRN10%3AIND
Are these countries moving towards hyperinflation and are the Euro going to blow up? I guess unless Germany spend more government money, the Euro Zone might face a mix of to low interest rates in countries like Greece (the spread between 10 year and short term rates set by the ECB would become 5,5 % if the ECB went to 0 %, I think that’s why they can’t lower interest rates any further, even rates are still to high for Germany.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Thanks Stats Watcher,
For reasons that I’ll elaborate on in the February Debtwatch, I disagree with some of the analysis in that Financial Sense post, as well as the conclusions. Unfortunately, I’m probably more pessimistic than you; given the scale of the debt we’ve accumulated, and our dependence on growing debt for aggregate demand, I expect we’re in for a serious Depression no matter what, and it will be prolonged for as long as governments continue trying to help the private sector validate debt that should never have been issued in the first place.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:33 am
I expect we’re in for currency collapses galore Prudentsaver,
But as you probably know, I expect deflation rather than inflation overall. Government’s can’t create inflation simply by increasing fiat money in a debt-encumbered credit-based economy–unless they’re willing to “print” a factor of ten more dollars than they’ve yet done, which I doubt. So I expect we’ll see international finance collapse and debt defaults galore, with cross-border interest rates becoming prohibitive, but domestic nominal rates heading for zero amid collapsing prices and incomes.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:42 am
The problem with a sum like that in our current crisis is that it’s trivial compared to the scale of de-leveraging we face, let alone to the scale of debt itself. It helps, but $10 billion is only half a percent of the most conservative measure of Australia’s outstanding private debt levels. It would probably pay just two weeks interest on the actual level of debt.
When the deleveraging gets up a head of steam, even a deliberate 1% reduction in debt levels would take three times as much money out of the economy as the $10 billion injection pumped into it.
But it kept the wolf from the door for a few people, so I don’t oppose it, especially when our government debt levels are as low as they are. But ultimately the only way out of this crisis is a still painful route of debt reduction via either inflation (which I don’t believe our economic managers know how to create) or legislative debt writedowns. Ironically I think attempts to bailout the economy financially like this have to be given time to fail before more serious measures will finally be considered.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:48 am
I expect the US dollar would plummet Frank.
As for its effect on inflation, it might simply wipe out a section of US consumption rather than drive its price all that much higher. Sales of Asian-manufactured consumer goods have already plummeted, even though the US dollar has appreciated largely so far, thus making these goods notionally cheaper. If the dollar’s oil prop were removed and its currency depreciated, sales of these items might evaporate even more.
There might be some domestic stimulus in that, but don’t forget that debt dynamics dominate here. Revival via domestic consumption is still a long way off.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:13 am
Hi Steve,
You say our economic managers don’t know how to create inflation. If you were given “control” would you be able to manufacture it?
Additionally, do you have any thoughts on what a debt write down might mean for savers, people’s super, etc?
Thanks for the blog by the way.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:27 am
By increasing wages across the board, and simultaneously letting corporations know they could pass on up to 99% of the increase in their costs as price increases–but no more.
The problem with trying monetary means to cause inflation–which Bernanke is doing right now–is that in an overindebted credit-money economy, the increase in fiat-generated money is more than offset by a collapse in credit-created money. That is apparent in the US data right now (though there is still a time lag to be taken into account). As a result, the money supply in toto can fall, even though the government is trying desperately to increase it.
In Japan’s case, even in a country with a high personal savings rate, increased fiat money was completely absorbed into private debt reduction. Japan tried a 30% increase in base money one year, only to see the rate of deflation accelerate the year after.
An increase in wages on the other hand would force companies to put up prices, and workers would have no option but to spend the increase in their nominal wages.
However this idea has Buckley’s chances of being attempted. I proposed this approach in a paper on debt deflation as a potential cure for Japan back in 2000, with zero expectation that it would be tried because neoclassical economists are so beholden to their fallacious theory of wage determination that they wouldn’t even consider centralised wage fixing, let alone an orchestrated increase in money wages.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:28 am
On the savers and super front, I think the latter is largely doomed no matter what–massive losses on shares and property will ultimately be crystallised. Savers, on the other hand, would do quite well out of a debt write-down in the context of overall deflation.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Hi Steve.
Here’s an article on how to shoot the messenger.
Seoul Cracks Down on an Internet Financial Guru
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1873346,00.html
It appears this bloke has been reasonably accurate at picking corporate collapses and the extent of the downturn and has attracted a huge following. So… the South Korean government has arrested him. He’s been arrested for supposedly spreading ‘misleading’ advise about the economy. Imagine if they instituted that here, half the financial community would be in Jail for talking it up when it continues to head down.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Thanks ‘Stats Watcher” I liked the Darryl Schoon article, this being 1 passage among a number.
“When people have their eyes shut and their minds closed, they will not see nor understand what is happening to them. Trust me on this, although many will not understand what is about to happen, it will not prevent it from happening.
What we are about to experience is an economic tragedy in personal terms that will exceed anything in recent memory. Even the Great Depression of the 1930s will not equal what is now about to be; and those who thought their adherence to a belief system about God was faith are now about to find out the difference.”
Thinking about how upset people are with losses of 15% to 25% or even more in the capital value of their super funds. Imagine
how distressed and they will be when they learn that this is not a one-off but a continuum.
Generally this is a “civilised” group whose reactions will probably translate to writing articles and ‘letters to the editor’, attempting to find a politician to vote against, maybe even marching across Sydney Harbour Bridge with ‘genuine reason’.
What about ‘uncivilised’ people when ruination visits upon them? How might we expect they will react?
We live on a small property and the GFC has really further highlighted the value of having a vegetable patch, with the help of the ‘mobile butcher’ transferring three of our lambs to the freezer, where we also put 6 rabbits after a recent hunting trip, and our water is stored in a tank from those rare occasions that it does rain.
Having ‘lost everything’ as a result of being a ‘silent partner’ in a business that failed when interest rates went from 9 to 18% in about 6 months (this being the upshot not cause – which was my own bad judgements).
Then marrying for the first and only time (I read the contract, understood what it meant and I endeavour to abide by the commitments I make. I also understand it is not a mechanical object and the excuse ‘it didn’t work’ is not valid) at 43, my wife and I determined a number of things about how we would approach life together.
We would pool personal resources and attempt to utilise them in the best mix, with the objective of attaining the best life/work balance.( going well so far)
If we were fortunate enough to have children
we would always have one of us at home to ‘raise them ourselves’. (we did and we have)
The almighty dollar and ‘maximising our income’ for its own sake or that of indulgence, would not be dominant in our strategy.(it hasn’t been)
The financial part of that strategy, after we bought our home, was to do everything within our means (without compromising the above) ‘to pay off the mortgage and other debt’. (we virtually have, though we have no savings)
Enjoying the inherent qualities of the process and fruits of working to maintain a sound marriage, and truly embracing the product and nurture of our union( raising and enjoying the kids), would be principal in our lives. (it has and continues – see dividends)
We would place a very high value on good health and the need to ‘work’ to retain it.
(a journey not a destination, still being travelled also see 1 above)
We would eliminate as far as possible life’s crappy minutee and spend a bit of time trying to understand how the systems (social, political, financial etc etc) work.
(we have, and the last one is why we’re here)
There are other things, but you get the drift.
NB , some will read this is being self-indulgent – it is not intended that way.
More a reflection on the “dividend we and others are receiving from our nonfinancial investments”, having rejected the advice/social pressure to follow the prevailing ‘way of the world’and become part of the rat race.
It is also a way of putting the proposition that, like it or not, more and more people will be driven to reassess what they call ‘capital’ AND their ‘valuations’.
Steve, ‘bullturnedbear’, ‘prudentsaver’ and others rightly emphasise the technical
economics and financial and monetary system issues, others like ‘tommyt’ and ‘MACCA’ at times as well as myself and others no doubt, like to consider the sociological aspects and ramifications.
Taken together it is all pretty interestingand intriguing, if at the same time scary.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Hi Steve,
I figure myself extremely fortunate to have come across you and your profound explanation for the worlds current state of affairs.
I am nearly 30 and have not bought a house. It has just never felt “right”. The prices have always slightly been out of reach for the savings that I have had at the time. I am an engineer (single), and earn good money. I don’t think my timing in life could have been any worse – yet now I can comprehend what has happened, and how blatantly wrong our governments economic management is. It scares me that I live in a country that doesn’t understand how the economy actually works.
I have many friends and family relations think of me as weird and crazy for not “getting into the market”. I now firmly believe I will be ahead of many people my age in five years time. Having saved a large deposit, I will continue to wait until this madness ceases.
With the interest and understanding I have gained in your outlook and theory, I am seriously considering studying again. Knowing that current economic theory is in general incorrect, where can you recommend studying modern theory that may one day rid the world of these absurd situations?
To me there seems to be an obvious, major part of the solution for the future – and that is to tightly regulate the lending practices of financial institutions in times of economic euphoria. Surely lessening the “ups” and “downs” of these cycles is a basic, necessary goal. Without having had this enormous, falsified up, we wouldn’t be facing this dramatic mess for the next X years.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
The idea of fixing things by increasing wages would be nice if increasing wages in the past hadn’t led to higher unemployment. Raising prices isn’t that easy, consumers can easily get upset and not buy or buy something imported, and wages increase immediately and increased income will take a while to flow back at a time when many business are having problems. What about government, they will be paying out more with a hoped for increase in revenue to match. Will it ? A significant amount of spending for both business and government is for capital works, this will increase in price with higher wages with no immediate increase in revenue.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Like and agree with most of your work Steve(that which I can understand anyway – the technical stuff is past me), but I have to take issue with the suggestion that the answer to this is to raise wages across the board.
What about the export industries? They cannot pass on the cost of the wages without losing market share and if Australia has any hope in coming through this it lies with our exporters. Last week I heard that the milk factories have reduced payment to the dairy farmers because of the falling world prices and at the same time a suggestion that Europe is going to ramp up their export subsidies.
You better prepare for ‘war’ with the NFF and the Mining Industry Council if keep to this line of argument.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Hi Steve,
what are yout thoughts regarding Gold and Silver bullion?
Taking physical delivery.
Yes cash is king for the moment but will cash be trash soon?
Where will they go over the next few years?
January 24th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
During the mid-80s I became very concerned at the balance of payments deficit that Australia was running and the associated build up of debt. My brief analysis of the stats at the time indicated that we were heading towards a “Banana Republic” at a rapid rate (well before Keating made his famous remarks).
As a result of those concerns I decided to pay off the mortgage as quickly as possible and became debt free – a feeling that still brings happiness every day.
However, as we climbed out of the recession of the early 90s and experienced the “good times” – I thought my analysis of debt and BoP must be wrong.
Then in September of 2007 my charting of the ASX indicated that we had broken out of the long term “high value”, like in 1987, and we were in for a correction. As I was waiting for the correction to “bottom” I heard Steve on ABC radio – once again I looked at the debt and BoP stats – hmmm a lot worse than the mid- 80s. What is even more concerning is that this happened at a time when we were digging up and shipping out resources like never before.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/5302.0
Effectively – Australia is now “borrowing” $3-4 billion a month to pay the interest bill on foreign equity and debt. (Steve – I know this is a simplistic interpretation so please correct me if I am wrong.) This is likely to rise to $5 billion a month (or more) as our export markets dry up and the cost of refinancing debt increases.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Hi Al
I’m with you on the sociology. I think human sentiment starts the whole process. Whether boom or bust. It all turns on sentiment.
Hi Steve,
Has the “raise wages idea” been tried? Also has it been tried in a world where demand is crashing because sentiment has turned completely negative? Like is happening now with people switching from spending to saving?
The increased wages could allow more income for debt reduction (while only marginly increasing spending). The burden for this would be placed on an already struggling business. The business may try to raise prices, but with demand crashing the market will set the prices lower than the businesses need to remain viable. This will accelerate the failure of business and lead to greater unemployment and bring on the depression and deflation even faster.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
The reason cash is king, is because it is the only way to pay your debts. The value of this “cash” is tied to the expansion of the “credit system” through private banking. This is what is so little understood by the hyperinflationists and the gold bugs. Gold has become a commodity, and “fiat dollars” have now suddenly become “gold”. I bet very few saw this comming. It’s a shame that so few “neoclassical economists” don’t have basic common sense and reasoning skills. A shame if it weren’t so serious!!
January 25th, 2009 at 12:01 am
For those of you with a “religious bent”, the solutions to this crisis are right there in the Old Testament. Every 7 years, debt was to be “forgiven” and every 50 years there was to be a “jubilee” which was basically the redistribution of all wealth. Forgiving debt every 7 years allows the geometric component of debt to be eliminated, and the redistribution of wealth every 50 years allowed the accumulated prosperity of the past to be evenly distributed thus empowering a new level of prosperity. It’s a shame that GREED has prevented so many religious people from recognizing these facts.
I think a critical examination of where we are right now would validate the above points beyond refute. Wealth is currently so concentrated in so few hands, that the economy is basically parilized. Geometric compound interest has finally met the wall of unsustainability….why is there so little common sense among economists?? GREED BABY GREED!!
January 25th, 2009 at 8:03 am
There are two major and looming problems with the Australian Banking system.
1. Australian banks are NOT WELL CAPITALISED AT ALL. A CAR (capital Adequacy ratio) of 8% means that a bank can lend 12.5 times its reserves. This model works like a charm when property prices (residential and commercial) are rising. An irony develops though.
As property prices rise, bank risk falls. But at some point in the future prices must fall. No system rises forever. For a time Banks think their risk is falling, so they continue to gear into the rises. The problem is that when prices start falling (and they are now) the risk levels rise dramatically overnight.
AUSTRALIAN BANKS BECAME DRUNK ON PROPERTY DEBT. Their profits skyrocketed. The crash in credit has already brought down many lending institutions in Australia. Only the majors remain. The crash in house prices will bring down all the banks. Only Government bail outs will keep them alive.
2. Somewhere between 30% to 50% of Australian bank liabilities (deposits and bonds) comes from overseas. This figure must run somewhere between $700B to $1.2T (does anyone have some exact figures). Risk aversion and demand for cash is rising around the World daily. The World is already pulling their money out of everywhere. When that trickle turns into a flood the Australian banking system is insolvent overnight.
The Sydney Morning Herald ran a story yesterday that KRudd and Swan were setting up a $4B fund to support property should the “banks and financiers have trouble rolling over the $75B in foreign lending that is due to roll over in the next 2 years”.
$75B is bull. They have conveniently counted only the foreign funded syndicated lending. Whilst they have ignored all other forms of foreign funding. This is political spin to start a story by saying we have a small problem. Later they can say the problem was bigger than we thought. Despite this, how can $4B help when $75B is the problem. $4B will rise, no doubt! The tax payers will be on the hook for 10s of billions. The real problem is that the $75B is over $700B. Australian banks are stuffed.
The best course for the government would be to let the weakest fall. Once this has run its course the Government should birth a new bank which is free of stupid risk and will be overrun by people desperate to deposit what little money they have left in a bank that is safe. Unfortunately this will only happen once the government and the people get sick of bailing out the failed banks. The cost to the taxpayers of the coming bailouts in Australia will be gigantic.
January 25th, 2009 at 8:27 am
More on Banking. This part is just crystal ball gazing now.
If the share market sell off that started Jan 9 finds a new low not too far from the current low. The Aussie banks will survive longer. If the Nov 21 lows are breached by another 25%, some Aussie Banks may be calling for government bailouts sooner rather than later.
I expect a rally in the markets after this current sell off. (to relieve the oversold position). I expect the rally to be the strongest to date. Once that rally sucks in enough bulls and many people think “this crises is over, we’ve solved it”. The next crash (new market lows) will be so big, that most people “holding for recovery” will either give up or it won’t matter because some of the companies they own shares in will be worth zero or close to it.
When this happens the Australian Banks will be on their knees and it will be better to have your cash well and truly out of them by then. Because cash will be very hard to come by.
My tip is that sometime between August and October 2009 the biggest market sell off will begin. The “point of recognition” will occur during or after that sell off. That is purely a guess based on history, sociology and some technical measures. I understand that many will disagree with my take. That’s cool. I’m happy to put it out there for ridicule.
This is just my lame prediction. Please do not rely on this to make investment decisions. Time is a terrible measure. It’s better to look for oversold or overbought conditions. I only lay out my time frame to show the urgency of personal action that is required.
January 25th, 2009 at 8:48 am
I’m talking global Halycon,
And not about a redistribution of income from capitalists to workers (though in Australia the shift to bosses has gone too far as well) but from financial capital to industrial capital. The whole point is not to increase real wages, but nominal ones and hence push commodity prices up while debt remains relatively constant.
January 25th, 2009 at 8:56 am
The opposite has been tried Bullturnedbear–cutting wages.
It was part of the reason for the depth of the Great Depression. All it did was maintain deflation, while real wages actually rose during the GD (for anyone that had a job).
My advice is a bit like what a driver should do after having lost control of a car while going around a bend: turn the wheels into the direction of the slide. That is the exact opposite of the natural reflex to turn even harder in the direction you want to go–but if you do that, you are doomed.
Ditto here. Neoclassical economists’ first reflex in a Depression is “cut wages, because it’s obvious that wages are too high, otherwise there wouldn’t be unemployment” (for anyone with an irony deficiency, I’m being ironic here). That has bugger all effect on real wages–because the cut in nominal wages is passed on to prices in a competitive environment amplified by deflation–and simply adds to the rate of deflation.
The opposite action–increasing money wages–could cause an instant jolt to inflation. Especially if it were centrally done and employers were told to pass on the cost increase (but no more).
But I am supremely confident that this idea will never be tested. Neoclassical economists might be dead wrong and actually have helped cause the current crisis, but their advice and their prejudices will still rule the roost in how policy makers respond to this crisis.
January 25th, 2009 at 8:59 am
Bullturnedbear, it sounds like you are a follower of Bob Prechter and the elliottwave guys?
January 25th, 2009 at 9:06 am
Steve, the only way that one can protect themself from the greatest depression that we are in is to own physical gold.Your theories are correct but while telling people what is coming i believe the public should be told how to protect themselves from the danger ahead.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:20 am
hi everyone, can anyone let me know (apologies if it has been raised before) if we should have ‘nationalised’ the banks last year? would this have ‘spooked’ the masses. I wonder what will happen after 1/10/2010 when the ‘guarantee is over? another guarantee? or failure of more banks?
January 25th, 2009 at 10:22 am
This might sound naive here but wouldn’t the housing bubble have been avoided if banks were only allowed to lend say 3 – 4 times the borrowers income. Therefore keeping house prices in check? Instead of the govt throwing money into housing grants why not pass a law that banks can only lend circa 3-4 times of a single borrowers income, most aussie loans are in fact “subprime” when one looks at the real income of the borrower.
This would drive house prices down to their real value – based on wages.
At the same time all the mugs that bought during the boom and basically got ripped off could apply for some kind of govt help ( first home owners grant money used to assist struggling current home owners ). As for investors, well they should be left to lick their wounds and accept their losses as they helped fuel this mess in the first place.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:54 am
To start paying off Australia’s debt we need to improve our balance of payments by around $6 billion a month). Possible actions to achieve this include
1. Increasing exports by 25% – this is not going to happen in the current GFC
2. Decreasing imports by 25% – this would result in a radical change in lifestyle (petrol imports are $3b and motor vehicles $1.5b a month)
3. Charity –unfortunately other countries are not going to “give” Australia $6 billion a month
4. Inflate our way out of the problem as Steve suggests – this is going to be very painful and will take many years of high inflation (something like 20% pa for a decade before debt becomes manageable)
5. Sell Australian Citizenships – 6,000 a month at $1 million each (I am not advocating this – just stating that this is an option for solving the problem)
Bullturnedbear – thanks for your “crystal ball gazing” – I think we are still a couple of months away from the next rally – February is going to be all bad news on the Stats and business reporting front. I would not be surprised if we see a further fall of 15-20% before the Ides of March.
Steve,
Your inflation solution will take many years to be effective (unless we end up with hyperinflation). What is your short term solution to the problem if other countries stop lending to Australia – given that we need $5 billion each month in new borrowings to support our lifestyle (let alone the roll over of existing debt)?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
RE: cutting wages vs increasing wages:
Steve, I’m an employer and an exporter. The 98c Aussie dollar almost broke us mid last year. We had to reduce costs (almost all salaries) which meant either layoffs of cutting wages. In the end we did a bit of both.
I’d love to pay my people more but the money ain’t there. Higher wages is a lovely idea to avoid deflation, but please explain where the money comes from?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Hi Steve,
I guess I sound like a defeatist when it comes to solutions. But I think this depression (as tragic as it will be) is necessary. The wash up will give Gen Y and Gen Z a fresh start. I am hopeful that the masses will reject the Government bail outs in time and “failure” will be allowed to occur. Maybe I’m just being too hopeful.
In terms of wages. The Economists may think that they cut wages in the GD. Maybe it was just the deflation (and human sentiment) that cut wages. I think falling wages are both necessary and going to happen. It all flows from risk aversion and the resultant falling demand.
Unless wages, prices and debt levels reset much lower, we will just have another bubble in the medium term. A total wash out will give our World another 70 years before the current “mistakes” are repeated in some new form.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Hi Elliotwave,
Yes I have been reading and following Bob Prechter for a while. His take on events is very calm and counter intuitive. Very interesting.
Hi Stats Whatcher,
I agree. I think the current sell off will run through Feb and Marchish. Before a large rally begins.
I also fear that rallies will become smaller and shorter than we would normally technically expect. During 1929 to 1932 most if not all of the larger degree rallies were about a third retracement. None appeared to retrace 1/2 or 2/3s.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
I’m doing that right now for the next Debtwatch Carbonsink,
The basic answer is that banks would be compelled to supply it–as they do under “normal” conditions when the extend working capital and maintain lines of credit.
But I hasten to add, I don’t expect this idea ever to be tried–I am aware of the resistance to it from all quarters. Instead we’re far more likely to see falling money wages–as we did in the Great Depression–but if anything rising real wages (for those who have jobs of course) as deflation more than outpaces the fall in wages.
This is what happened during the Great Depression, and as you’ll see in the next Debtwatch, it happens in my model of a credit crunch as well.
And Bullturnedbear, I am also a defeatist on solutions in your sense. What I hope to do is make the pain less extreme, and also set in stone institutional changes that will prevent a recurrence of this. But even there I expect I won’t be listened to sufficiently, and the reforms that are ultimately enacted will leave the seeds there for another bubble and crash in half a century or so. I just hope that when that one comes, finally meaningful changes will be instituted.
We humans are brilliant innovators, but when it comes to collective factors in what Soros called reflexivity, we are very slow learners.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
i must say i agree with bullturnedbears sentiment on the market-early feb the adjusted data for the USA is released and i expect the market to be bearish-but sometime in march april expect a dummy bull run to come through with obama euphoria and his stimulus plan- market might go to 4400+- but come the US fall/winter watch out- the market will be heading south for the winter or should i say ice age- wonder what odds the bookies will give me on the market going well below 2000 by the end of 2010.
bullturnedbear is right to be concerned about the stability of our banking system- but i think first cab off the rank in terms of banking collapses might end up being a very high profile investment bank with a big fat zero as there logo-ive had this feeling for many years even before jim chanos starting ringing the alarm bells-we’ll see
frank raised an interesting point about the US dollar oil realtionship- the herd is currently grazing on US dollars- the key word here is “relative”- right now everybody wants to be liquid-but in what currency-US dollar is the best of a bad bunch-better the devil you know-thats why the US dollar will keep going up this year along with the price of a barrel of oil-oil might end up at $70 a barrel – and subsequently what odds on our beloved aussie dollar at well below 50 cents US – this wont change until someone has the gumption to start writting multi billion dollar deals in another currency – and the problem is whos currency do you trust- better the devil you know seems to be the go at the moment
enough tea leaf reading
most enjoyable blog steve-contantly finding the level of discourse most enlightening
January 25th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Gold and Silver bullion are easy to buy from the Perth Mint.
Google them and call them.
You agree on the price – they email you the contract and then you fax it back signed.
Then you can send them the money using internet banking.
It arrives in the mail – you have to sign for it.
I really feel this is the only way people will hold onto their savings in the next few years…
Gold is going to appreciate against all currencies – there is still time but she is moving up to $900USoz – once it gets back over $1000 – this time i don’t think it will go back down.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Hi Steve,
It seems we concur on the likely outcomes and course of events. This blog has become compulsive viewing. One strong confirmation of this is that my wife is now upset with me about blogging too much.
Hi dpmartin,
The reason I believe banks were not limited in the way they approved loans is because of herd mentality or sentiment.
The borrowers (herd) wanted to borrow as much as they could. Over time this process drove governments and further drove the herd to a point where they borrowed more than they could actually afford. Reflexivity!!!
The best place to look for this is in the US where Investment Banks were allowed to do as they pleased (leveraged up to 50 times). Because that’s what the herd of investors wanted.
I also believe that this process will fully reverse itself. Debt levels will fall to multi decade lows. As that is happening the herd will demand that governments get tough on banks so that “it never happens again”. The result of this will be that it will become very hard to get finance. This will slow the muted recovery and extend the pain longer. Also at the bottom (whatever that means). The borrowers will totally shun debt altogether as well.
Anyone that is able and willing to borrow around that time will benefit from massive rises in asset value before the World even wakes up that the worst is over. To find a bottom to this mess though, will take enormous patience and a long time.
January 25th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
STEVE,
Can you please comment on GOLD!!!
Thanks and all the best.
Bill Moore
January 25th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I’m not a gold buff wmmmoore, but I’m reluctantly coming to the opinion that it will be a useful hedge against what is probably coming our way in terms of economic and financial chaos. It could easily lose a lot of its monetary value in the next year or so though, before probably going the way that dojufitz and others here anticipate.
January 25th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Steve Keen wrote:
“it” being money to pay my employees more?
Look, I’m kinda old-fashioned when it comes to running a business. The company has never borrowed a cent. We’ve always worked on the basis that we try to sell more than we spend. When we don’t sell more than we spend, we cut costs.
I’d love for banks to supply me with free money to give my employees, but I can’t see it happening anytime soon.
January 25th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
i agree with you steve-gold isnt going anywhere soon,it might go up against other currencies but in US dollar terms its only going down . gold i think is like a de facto currency, its less mobile ,less liquid ,less convertible than the US dollar AT THE MOMENT- as people are fleeing these imploding assett bubbles, the last resort at the moment is the US dollar- one day it will cease to be the last resort and gold will have its day as it becomes the last resort amid the turmoil.
if the US government keeps going on its merry spree converting corporate risk into sovereign risk , it might do just enough to convince the rest of us the only thing the US dollar will be good for is wiping ones fan one the exscrement hits
January 25th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Steve, how would increasing wages work if the prices are to be increased in line as well? I thought the problem is debt that is so huge now, it can’t be amortised or refinanced anymore when asset prices go down. If people get paid more money, but have to spend more to acquire necessities, where the extra savings required to reduce debt will come from?
Wouldn’t having a government sponsored moratorium on interest, plus certain percentage of debt writedown be a better approach? I guess it is better outcome for everyone (compared to bankruptcy and prospect of minimal recovery).
January 25th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
hi bullturnedbear, your comments on the banking system most enlightening. like you i think we are going to face a major banking crises. but as steve has said previously we are going to get the credit and macro economic crunch first. please forgive me if my reasoning has more holes in it than a slice of swiss cheese, perhaps you can set me straight. i am confused. i still cant grasp the direct connection between falling house prices and banking insolvency- the price of a house may rise or fall but the income stream the house loan provides to the bank would be the key. the reason how all this mess started in the US is because home owners were unable to pay back their loans and thus the assetts held by various banks and financial institutions became worthless.
a bank in australia borrows a million dollars and that theoretically allows them to turn that into 12 million in loans or assetts. the problem for them would be that they usually borrow short term and lend long term- so that million has to be re financed in a year or so. if the bank that lent them the money says we cant roll it over then they have a problem. and i presume if this scenario keeps repeating itself the whole banking system has a problem- a 100 billion shortfall in their re financing would lead to over a trillion dollar hit to the their capital adequacy requirments- thats why the government has been openly canvassing the prospect loosening the CAR- the availability of credit would collapse as you rightly point out and any busines’s that rely on large short term re financing-eg housing and contruction industry would collapse with it
but as long as people and busineses are able to service their debts the banks remain viable. thats a big if since the collapse in credit would lead to a collapse of many busineses and jobs-
like steve says- a credit and macro crunch folowed by a financial crises
so my point is falling house prices are more likely to be a symptom of the problem rather than the initial cause. house prices fell sharply in the early 90s but the 4 major banks didnt go under then- admittedly the situation is infinately worse this time round
as i mentioned to steve in a rcent email-if the banking situation gets bad enough we might all have to take a leaf out of that well known investment guru tony soprano. he hid his money in plastic bag under the compost bin- quite an apt image given the circumstances
January 25th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
There have been quite a few comments on gold. I was also interested in it for a while, but no longer. There are too many respected people making claims that the gold markets are being manipulated by central banks. I am in no way predisposed to believing in evil plots, but looking at the way fractional reserving banking works, and the incentives behind maintaining the credibility of the dollar, it would not surprise at all if concerted efforts were being made to discredit gold as a useful store of wealth. If it is indeed the case, then I wonder how long this can go on – eventually someone is going to run out of gold to dump on the market.
Regarding the USD-oil prop, Iran trades oil in Euros as of the start of 2008. It’s no wonder the US is demonising those poor buggers. But can someone please elaborate for me the following? I have read that Sovereign Wealth Funds pose a threat somehow to this oil prop. That is, apparently, exporting nations have a decreasing incentive to hold USD. How does that work? If at all?
January 25th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
I read Harry Dent Jnr’s recent book ‘The Great Depression’. It provides new support (using demographics & various market cycles) for the bears (grggh) with claims of a confluence of a peak in babyboomer (the largest generation in 250 years) spending by 2010, market saturation of technology by 2009, and a commodity 30year cycle peak in 2009 (this may have hit already..).It seems an impressively researched and praised book. He predicted booms up until now but over did it on the upside a bit (DOW 32-40,000 was a 2009 prediction made in 1998 modified to DOW 2009 20,000 in 2006). He also picked the 2000 tech bubble correction but underplayed it on the downside (expected only a 20-30% decline). He thinks this depression won’t be as bad as the GD because ‘our economy and financial systems are more mature and sophisticated, the likely continued strong long term growth in emerging countries, we wont make the same mistakes as in the GD, and we are in a 500year Mega innovation cycle…’. Having said that he sees the possibility of 10-15% US unemployment and DOW 3800 by late 2010.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Hi Mahaish,
I agree with both you and Steve on the macro shock as being a likely outcome for Australia. Rising unemployment will directly impact property prices. Yet interestingly house prices are already falling hard and unemployment has hardly moved yet. Falling sentiment can start a negative chain of events that will feed unemployment and further feed falling house prices, which will further feed negative sentiment towards housing. Etc.
The link between falling house prices and increasing banking risk is security. Banks hold houses or commercial properties, etc as security to protect their assets (loans). Therefore when prices are falling their security can become worth less than the bank’s assets.
Sentiment is a funny animal. When prices are rising sentiment towards property rises and more people buy. Even though houses cost more. When prices are falling, less people tend to buy, even though houses are cheaper. Weird hey?
In 1991/92 Westpac almost went broke. They had over-lent on commercial property and to corporate tycoons. When commercial prices crashed (up to 50%) they called in many loans. They did this even when some borrowers were making their payments.
Bank’s have re-valuation clauses in all their documents. If a bank fears that the security may have fallen in value, causing the loan to valuation ratio to rise above its max allowable. It reserves the right to revalue the property. If there is a shortfall, the bank could then demand a principal reduction to bring the loan back within its covenants. Of course very few have cash (or extra unencumbered properties) lying around to pay or they would have paid it off the loan in the first place. So the borrower is in default and the bank goes mortgagee in possession. Problem is there are no buyers (when the bank tries to realise on their security) because sentiment towards property in a falling market is in the toilet. Net result, the borrower is wiped out and the bank has to write off a bomb. Now multiply this by 1000s of customers and the bank is in big trouble. Unless it can raise fresh capital.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
But Why wold the bank do that Bullturnedbear?? It seems like cutting off their nose to site their face. Especially if the mortgagee is making the payments the bank is undoubtedly making money from a asset that isn’t as valuable as they made the loan for, therefore making the bank a greater profit, leaving the bloke who overpaid to make excessive payments that they can (somehow) afford. Forcing a debtor into bankruptcy would not help either party as far as I can see.
Having said that it is a worrying factor and I will have to check my documentation to see if this is applicable to my loan and under what conditions they can pursue this course of action.
January 25th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
On the basis of his expectations about this crisis (and the reasons he gave here for them) Robert, I am not inclined to agree with his conclusions.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:14 am
Look, I don’t know why none of you even addressed the primary issues here, the “cause” if you will. PEOPLE ARE BROKE!! In this environment, no one with money is going to be spending or investing it. PERIOD. This will continue to produce a downward spiral of debt default, which will lead to less lending, more job losses and less spending….rinse…repeat. The endgame…if the governments of the world hold together…WILL BE a repudiation of debt. The only question is how painful this process will be. NOT IF BUT HOW!! The ones who have benefitted from this financial house of cards are the ones who control the governmental policies, so if they act in their own self interest, (which there is no reason to expect that they won’t)..the problem will only get worse, and once again on a GLOBAL scale. They misdiagnose the problem, and prescribe more of what caused the problem, “debt”, and “maldistribution of wealth via compound interest”. Am I way off here?? I would like to know Steve’s opinion on this….but only if he is brav…errr willing to address what I have stated.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:46 am
Steve,
there is alot of discussion about the coming US Bond market bursting.
What are your thoughts?
If govts can’t sell the debt to finance the promises doesn’t that bankrupt them?
And if the Fed simply buys the bonds doesn’t that create Hyperinflation due to printing money?
January 26th, 2009 at 6:35 am
Hi Ned,
There are two reasons Westpac did this in the early nineties.
1. Because the one that jumps first has a better chance of realising on an asset. If one waits when everyone else waits there is a flood.
2. Liquidity problems. If a bank has run a cash flow forecast and feels that in 6 months they will be out of money (and raising money is tough) then the only way to get money is to start calling in loans.
The mortagage funds and third tier lenders are “reviewing” and not rolling over existing clients now. It doesn’t mean those clients are all being sold up. Some are able to refinance. But some are not able for various reason and they will be on the market in varying numbers this year. The reason is the funders and depositors have become nervous and want their money back. The only way to do this is to call in the loans.
January 26th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Steve, it appears that the housing bubble sceptics might start to ‘understand’! in the ‘smh’ today 26/1, an article by Natalie Craig,”Australia is home to three of the most “severely unaffordable housing markets” studied by an international group that predicts that the housing bubble here is YET TO BURST!!” It goes on to say, “The public policy group ‘Demographia’,which conducted the study,said affordability in Australia was worsening relative to Britain,Ireland and New Zealand,where prices had recently collapsed”
“Australia would be next,it said.”Sooner or later,the inherent instability that characterises virtually all bubbles will lead to house price declines in Australia” it said.
and further at home,
Alan Moran, director of the deregulation unit at the institute of public affairs, said “…Adjusted for inflation,the average house price in Australia is now twice what it was 20 years ago.”
That should put an end to this argument, right?
Spruiking real estate dead,after all?? yeah right!government assistance for more debt to young people? yeah right!
January 26th, 2009 at 9:07 am
I can’t keep up with news stories about real estate. One week prices are dropping then the next week they are set to rise. In today’s NINE MSM there was one saying rents are about to go through the roof and last weeks there were articles saying rents were set to fall…And on and on it goes.
I overhear conversations at work and two people I know – both not the smartest tools in the box – are buying more “investment” properties and talking up prices even more. Both these fools are in debt to up to their eyeballs already. Should my tax money really bail these people when it all goes belly up for them?
I watch the news and it appears Rudd and Swan don’t what the hell is going on and are just parroting their advisers, who evidently don’t understand what is happening.
Yet the fix and the cause appears simple to me.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:56 am
No arguments with you here Deflationist, and I’ve been saying much what you say here on previous blog postings. Though I speculated about a wage rise solution, I don’t expect it to be tried, and my preferred solution remains the one you nominate: a (partial) repudiation of debt.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:04 am
George Monbiot (better known for Global Warming) has posted an interesting solution to the problems of the GFC.
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/01/20/a-better-way-to-make-money/
Although “new” currency at a local level could solve many problems of the GFC it will never happen. Governments and Banks would not accept people taking control over their finances in this way as it threaten the tax base and challenges banks authority.
However, what will happen if we do move into depression is that people will trade and swap (with or without cash) and this “cash economy” (untaxed) will thrive. (eg A plumber fixes your taps for a dozen cabbages from your vegie patch)
A problem that this presents to government and neo-classical economists is that the “cash economy” (swapping, barter, trade) is not included in the ABS measure of GDP. As the cash economy rapidly increases the “official” economy will continue to contract.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Tommyt (and Steve),
There is more to the Demographia report. It goes on to say:
“Unlike the other national markets in the Survey ? Australia has thus far been able to avoid material house price declines. It seems likely that, sooner or later, the inherent instability and unsustainability that characterizes bubbles will lead to house price declines in Australia. However, were it possible for Australia to retain its highly over-valued house prices, there would still be a significant cost. Future generations would pay far more for housing than in the past, and Australia’s relative standard of living would decline.”
It is this ‘however’ that is interesting. Is it possible that Australia will avoid a massive house price fall given what is happening in the US and UK markets? The Demographia report mentions the leading cause as prescriptive land release policies – constraining supply; this is particularly true of the ACT, where the government basically runs on stamp duty on housing and thus has a vested interest in keeping prices high through restricting land release. And this government is kept in power by voters who have a vested interest in housing prices remaining high.
I wonder, if the US and UK had constrained supply of land, like us, why is our market not crashing? (look at the Demograhia report – there is no crash in Australia). What unique features of their economies made this happen to them, but not to us?
And finally, Steve, how does forgiving the debt of profligate people do anything but encourage more of the same behaviour? (I’m sure I misunderstand) I wonder, for example, how providing government handouts to big business does anything but encourage poor management, poor investment and the like.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Hi Austerity,
I met Hugh Pavletich, the co-author of Demographia courtesy of an SBS Insight program about a year ago. He’s a New Zealand and a retired successful property developer, and a very nice bloke as well. While I agree with his arguments about overvaluation of housing, I don’t agree that the entire cause is government restrictions on the release of land.
If this were the only cause of the current crisis, then the USA largely wouldn’t be having one–as you will see from the survey, much of the USA’s housing qualifies as affordable. The fundamental cause of this crisis, in my opinion, is the financial system’s willingness to finance asset price speculation–whether those assets be shares, houses, or three legged llamas.
This is also why I favour debt writedowns–but also only in the context of a substantial revision of the financial system via redefinitions of asset markets, so that the enticement to speculate on asset prices is removed. In our financial system it is the lending side of the equation that is fundamentally irresponsible, and also the only way out of this crisis is to eliminate the debt accumulated via this speculative lending. There will be plenty of unjustified winners out of that change, but there were also plenty of unjustified winners out of the system too. Ultimately I want a suite of reforms that tackles the root cause of the problem and prevents its recurrence, rather than ones that apportion blame but possibly let the problem fester once more.
In the system I envisage, the only reasons firms would approach banks would be for working capital and to fund new innovations when the costs of so doing exceed their retained profits, and the only reason households would do so would be to finance house purchases as an alternative to renting, rather than for expected house price appreciation. The banking system that came into being after the bankruptcy of this one would no longer be able to finance speculation on asset prices.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Be careful of Demographia’s motives. They are basically a lobby group run by conservative consultant Wendell Cox to promote unrestrained development. That’s not to say Demographia’s reports don’t have merit. Their long-running income vs house-price ratio has been very valuable in exposing the scale of the housing bubble.
Deflationist wrote: “PEOPLE ARE BROKE!!”
Just out of interest, how many people here have savings that could keep them going for months or years if they were to have no income for an extended period? By “savings” I don’t mean equity in your home, superannuation, or other illiquid investments, I mean cash or similar.
In my experience most people have very little in the way of savings, and are completely unprepared for losing their income.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
hi bullturnedbear
take your point re banks re evaluating or calling in loans. but in this climate-it wont get too far if the 4 majors start behaving this way.if the phenomenon gets too wide spread any government concerned about its political survival will act. if its one thing politicians have learned from the 30s is that they wont tolerate families being thrown out on the street. a messy expensive compromise will be reached at the expense of the taxpayer
January 26th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
I think you can see the strategy of the Govt to prop up property prices as best it can. KRudd will have the Govt to step into the breach to provide loans that roll over soon that the Banks are unable or finding difficult to finance. It is then not such a short hp to doing something similar for mortgage related financing.
Combined with the inevitable lowering of reserve requirements and all sort of other goodies that the banks will be asking for to stay their hands on calling in security on mortgages,this will all add up to a very handsome sum that WE the taxpyers will have to fund eventually. It is what is happening in the US and UK- it will surely happen here.
I still see comments on here about whether or not house prices in Australia may or may not escape a severe decline. Wake up people, that boat has ALREADY sailed. House prices already ARE in decline in Australia and at a very significant pace.In Brisbane on average house prices are down5-10% already with many postcodes declining 20+% from their peaks. What houses in perth and Victoria, Sydney are not declining??
And this is without the severe unemployment about to roll through our economy. Many current mortgage holders will be forced to sell. Many of those get rich quick “investment properties” will neeed to be liquidated. As many households lose one of their 2 jobs they will be under pressure to liquidate or downsize. As house price declines become more widespread the more desperate sellers will settle for the best they can get, thus undermining further prices accross the neighbourhood. Banks will be forced to review thier LTV ratios (as Bullturnedbear noted above).Govt will not be able to fill that hole despite talking up a storm on what it is they will (plan to ) do.
There is every evidence that our Govt is about to send this country broke, just like the US and the UK Govts before them. All in order to “save jobs”, “save property prices”, “save banks” – by raiding YOUR savings.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Bailing out debts sounds like a necessary step, but how can the bubble be prevented from re-inflating?
Steve, surely a large part of the housing bubble is misinformation? From the RBA “Some Observations on the Cost of Housing in Australia”, it is obvious that property prices were growing much faster than the more rational rent prices. Would there be any way to educate consumers on an appropriate price for a dwelling? If the data is available, it shouldn’t be too hard calculate the value of property in a postcode given current rental information, and the long-term ratio of rental price to property price.
This wouldn’t account for regions that might suddenly increase in value (due to gentrification or a local business boom), or regions that might fall (due to decline in the neighborhood or a local business closing), but it could be used as a tool to inform the majority of potential investors how much property is worth.
I say that rent is more rational than property price because renters don’t speculate, and property investors do. The 0.8 (down from 1.2) people per bedroom in our current society is driven by house-owners toughing it out, hoping that their mansions will eventually double in value, and by renters living in subsidized dwellings. If rents rise, renters demand goes down. If house prices rise, house ownership demand often goes up (as they chase the bubble).
Do you know of any agency that could track rental and property prices, to provide consumers with a guide to the housing market? I really don’t think that existing players have any incentive to keep people informed, but I am pretty sure that the data should be out there.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
hi frank
dont think anybody knows how much gold is actually stockpiled around the vaults of the world. i wouldnt be too down on gold
gold is like the church. not everybody goes to church but its nice to know that its there.
in a crisis when all hope is lost people begin to bargain with god
well its the same with gold. in a crisis when all faith is lost (in the american dollar) people will bargain with gold
that moment hasnt arrived yet and im not sure if it will come any time soon.
see, most treasury officials and central bankers around the world still think we can beat this thing only suffering a few flesh wounds on the way.
we are in the first phase of the crises ‘denial’
we still have anger, bargaining , depression to go before we finally get to acceptance
as far as incentives to hold US dollars- i suppose the question is ‘as oppossed to what’
in this world the way it is, the only game in town is the US dollar, AT THE MOMENT.
even in the US’s darkest hour you can walk into any dark and dingy corner of the civilised world with a fist full of US dollars and you will find someone willing to take them off your hands. try doing that with a fist full yuan, or ruppees or even euros or aussie dollars
January 26th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Bullturnedbear, I enjoy reading your comments. Earlier you said “Rising unemployment will directly impact property prices. Yet interestingly house prices are already falling hard and unemployment has hardly moved yet.”
I’ve got some views on this – and have to say upfront, my thinking has been shaped significantly by my reading of Shiller on housing markets – so it’s hard to know how much of what I am about to say is my own original thinking, and how much is what I absorbed of his. Anyway, it is being applied to the current Aussie situation, so that is new.
I’m not at all surprised that the housing market has turned well before unemployment. In actual fact, it is fairly clear that most markets peaked late 2007 (activity) with price peaks occurring in March qtr 2008.
To understand why this occurred we need to understand what propelled the bubble. My view is that one of the most significant propellants was the bubble-associated myths that “house prices never go down” and “if you don’t buy now, you’ll never be able to”.
We all know that there is a premium to be paid for living in a home that you call your own (even while renting the money from a lender) over renting. As the basic necessity that we are purchasing is shelter, which we derive regardless of whether we own the property or rent it, the premium paid is for the intangible emotional benefits.
When we say that housing is in a bubble, we compare median price to median/average earnings, or rental yields, and say they’re well above what people historically have been prepared to pay. But what we are actually saying is that the emotional premium being paid is well beyond what historically people have been prepared to pay (and that is the important part because the emotion of being secure hasn’t altered since we clubbed our food.) (And note, the emotional premium relates equally to investors – they want to be financially secure.)
And of course, government policy alters the equation, but I would suggest their greatest effects are on the emotions of market participants (eg. FHBs with the FHOB).
The point is that this emotional premium didn’t go from reasonably stable rational levels to bubble levels in an instant – it happened incrementally – until where we were in March qtr 08 in Brissie when the premium being paid was actually 160% (ie. under conservative calculations, such as 10% deposit, the fortnightly cost of buying the median home was 2.6 times what it cost to rent it).
How did we go through those increments until we got to that point? – because up until then, buyers thought that prices would never go down, and even though they were paying an absolutely ridiculous premium, they thought that premium would only grow (as it had over the last 7 years – the positive feedback loops) and they’d be even less able to afford that premium in a few more years.
The spell broke somewhere along the line. Partly the shear reality that they could not afford to pay that premium even if they wanted (interest rates played a minor part because in many markets there were stil strong price rises in the last 12 months of the bull market.) But I think probably more important were the negative feedback loops emanating from the US housing market which had peaked 20 months earlier and the price falls were accelerating and making news.
I would argue that all of this forced buyers to examine the prices – the premium – that they were being asked to pay, and the herd began to turn.
That’s why we didn’t need unemployment to turn up for the market to begin to correct, it is why it would have corrected significantly even if there were no global economic turmoil, and it is why the correction will be very severe now that we do have major weaknesses elsewhere in our economy.
Personally, I always thought 30% correction in nominal terms was likely (perhaps conservative), but I’m beginning to think even Steve’s forecast of 40% is conservative.
My figures on several postcodes of interest in Brisbane (sorry for the hometown focus, but I’m paying for the data so…) show that house sales were down 70% in the Sept qtr 08 over 07. What’s more, sales were down 90% in the month of Sep 08 over 07.
Remember how Steve was copping a caning from certain members of the press around this period – no doubt those “in the know” were discussing what was happening on the ground – makes me even more cynical of the press, etc!
January 26th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Hi Brett,
About prices falling without unemployment rising, I was being sarcastic. I follow the notion that sentiment drives all markets. People turn bullish before the numbers show it and so too on the way down.
On the Northern Beaches of Sydney house prices are down 20% to 25% from the peak. This is only anecdotal, but volume of sales is through the floor as well.
Just prior to Christmas there were 200+ houses available for rent in Mosman (most expensive suburb in Australia measured by median prices, or at least it used to be). 200+ for rent is unusually high in an area where most are owner occupiers. I discussed this with my sister and she floated the idea that owners that had borrowed too much had decided to rent out their house to “ride out the storm”. If that was the case that market will crash big time before the middle of this year. In fact it has probably already crashed.
A banker also told me a story about Mosman (he lives in the suburb). He said a guy had gone to 20 home opens (in November) to view properties asking over $2M. In each case he offered $1.2M take it or leave it. He had two vendors say they would accept the offer.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
‘MACCA’ the use of the phrase “….talking up a storm …..”
is probably ill chosen out of deference to those poor buggers in Toowoomba is it Townsville . or all over the place !!!
January 26th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Hi Carbonsink,
I believe most people either have debt or hard assets. I agree, very few people have cash as a buffer.
I have been saying on this blog for a while. If you own a house sell it while you can. Renting is fine until the crash takes hold.
For the record I think a 40% fall in house prices is way optimistic. Are you guys aware that in some Counties of California prices are down 68% as at the November release of the figures.
Have I been reading correctly that housing debt in Oz is twice as bad as it is in the US? Then it stands that the fallout will be far worse here.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
al49er,
Point taken. But you get my meaning…….
January 26th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Hi All,
I had a new thought today to add to the debate.
I have believed for a while that at some point the World will get tired of the bailouts. When people see that they are not working they will demand that governments stop wasting money. If that occurs. It will be good and bad for Australia.
The bad is a depression sooner rather than later, but a recovery without as much government debt.
The good is that Australia is at least 12 months behind the US. So far our government has spent very little on bailouts. If we avoid major bailouts by the time the others give up our government will save a fortune.
The government bank guarantee is a big hole in my theory though.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Steve, Brett etc
Thanks for the details. I will have to do more reading. As for the comments that follow my last entry: so many different numbers. There have been many big numbers over the last six months, the one that struck me the most was the UK interest rate at its lowest in 300 years. That has to be bad!
But, decent stats are hard to find. For example, finding two-way trade figures – you will need to have a subscription, I believe, to the IMF Direction of Trade stats. ABS figures lag (and there website is not the clearest) and in the interim people, groups, such as REIQ and others cherry pick stats to meet their own agendas.
I think, that in addition to all the solutions proffered on this site and others, transparency and uniformity in global statistics is also needed. Otherwise, it is all too easy to obfuscate. Although, perhaps this has already been suggested.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Austerity, cherry picking is one thing. I’m starting to wonder whether it is now going beyond that – check out this artice
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24953284-5011140,00.html
Note the following “during the two quarters [Sep 07 and 08] the Brisbane local government area recorded a 21.4 per cent decrease in house sale figures from 3361 to 2643, according to preliminary data from the Real Estate Institute of Queensland.”
According to the Australian Bureau Statistics, in Sept qtr 2007 the number of Brisbane house transfers was over 3 times that at 11,488!
The postcodes that I track (I have data going back 2 years) cover 7.8% of the Brisbane Statistical Division (based on 2006 census). Over the 4 quarters that overlap with the released ABS data, sales in this area (in my data) have represented 7.4-7.9% of the ABS figure for Brisbane house sales.
So I would suggest that my data are reasonably representative of Brisbane according to the ABS data.
So I’ll go out on a limb here and say that in a week when the next housing data is released by the ABS on 2 Feb, for June qtr 08 the number of Brisbane house transfers will be 6,885 (+/- 5%) – a fall over the same period of the previous year of around 36%.
For September qtr 2008, my forecast is for a figure of 3,410 (+/- 5%) – a fall over the same period of the previous year of around 80%.
Let’s see how close I get
January 26th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
On dodgy stats, obfuscation , “cherry picking”, spin and mind management;
I am often reminded of Orwell’s 1984 with the all powerful Ministry of Truth- spewing out daily propaganda to the sheeple in order to keep them compliant, manageable and ignorant. Feeding their insecurities with soothing ministrations of supposed omnipotence. At all times making people believe they have all bases covered.
This is very dangerous. Opportunities for preparation are being squandered. Worse, the public is being deliberately mislead with a compliant MSM meekly serving the MOT and The Pigmen (big Banks and money men).
All data originating from a vested interest source should be suspect. Therefore, all Govt data is suspect.
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Steve,
Based on Orwell (thanks, Macca), you are a revolutionary.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Hi Steve,
You said “There will be plenty of unjustified winners out of that change, but there were also plenty of unjustified winners out of the system too.”
I don’t mind the unjustified winners too much, it’s the unjustified losers that I don’t wish to see, me being one of them.
You weren’t the only one who saw this coming and as such I’ve made sure that I have no debt and money in the bank (however safe that may be in the longer term is anyone’s guess).Strange how it is that so many suggested remedies of this mess we are entering revolve around punishing those of us that have been prudent and farsighted with our business. The ‘perceived wisdom’ of inflating out of this mess and the lunacy that came from Anatole Kaletsky of taxing savings so we would spend are but 2 examples. Default may be harsh, but it will clean up the mess much quicker than any other ‘remedy’ I can think of.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Steve,
I am interested in how you mentioned you would possibly be in favour of “debt writedowns”, and also when you said there would be some unjustified winners.
Can you elaborate on this? What groups, or type of people would you target first? How would you rationalise who should benefit and who shouldn’t? Those who took the initial risks need to be prepared for the losses. Even though the banks promoted lending to speculate (implicitly) – those who didn’t suffer the “greater fool” theory should be rewarded for being a fair and reasonable citizen. This is ultimately the goal of an ideal society (although the government doesn’t seem to think so).
I would also be interested to hear your views on APRA. Considering what has occurred over the past decade (and possibly longer), they certainly have a lot to answer for in terms of “regulation”. Understanding that the solution to these crises is rigorous control of the financing of credit (both in upwards and downwards perturbations), why wouldn’t APRA take note of more modern theory in order to satisfy part of their mission statement?:
http://www.apra.gov.au/aboutApra/
Foresight
* Our analysis of issues is forward-looking.
* Using all of the information available to us, we identify potential problems and actively pursue remedial action when necessary.
* We stay at the forefront of developments that affect our role by continually learning new skills and enhancing our knowledge.
Mind you, I’m placing aside all hidden agendas. I wouldn’t like to think that our Government has some conflict of interest in promoting house price growth. No, no, it couldn’t be…
January 26th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
hi steve
interesting idea jacking up the total price level in the economy thus winding back the debt to gdp ratio
my problem is i am against letting governments have anything to do with manipulating prices on such a large scale. one of the few things the government or official family have a modicum of control over is the price of credit, and their record in this area to put it mildly is appauling. remember when headline interest rates were at 17% and the recession we had to have. and what about the last 10 years. had the reserve kept interest rates at much higher levels we might not be going through this debt induced vietnam. its not only markets that over shoot or under shoot.
also what about our exporters. surely such a price hike could decimate up to 20% of our gdp thus negating gains in the price hike. or have i got my sums wrong.
whether we go down the inflationary path or debt forgiveness path i cant see how it can be done without an international co ordinated response given the interconnectedness of the global banking system. if countries go it alone it will leave them exposed to all sorts of currency and trade related shocks.
as many fellow bloggers have pointed out, its not just an economic crisis thats coming our way but a psychological one. this raises an interesting conundrum. how far back do we need to wind back the debt to gdb ratio to overcome the psychological inertia thats building in the system towards lending money or borrowing money.
gone are the days of glad handing sicophants at your local bank. it wont be long before you will have to put up with walking across hot coals and signing your name in blood, and the bank manager looking you up and down as if you were about to rob the place, in order to get a loan.
thats if you are not so sh*t scared about the world that it will be a cold day in hell before you ever borrow money again.
to me, winding back the debt to gdp ratio even back to 100% may not be enough to break the psychological eversion to debt that will keep building as this crisis unfolds. who knows i may be wrong, the banks and the government might have done a good enough job of pimping credit to us debt junkies that we cant help ourselves and that every bit of largess the government and the reserve bank will throw at us over the coming year we will spend .
kevin rudd would love us to do this, but i wouldnt count on it. but i think kevin should stop talking to us blokes and talk to the female section of or demographic, because every women i know is a shop aholic. apparenlty one can never have enough shoes or frocks
surely, instead of trying to prop up prices we should let them fall to a level that people again can afford to buy things through the efforts of their own labours.
we need prices to fall and time to get over the emotional scars before we deicide to start spending and borrowing again.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
‘Just jokin’ MACCA.
There was a hint you might have thought I was serious!
How often have people heard the retort,
“that was in the past, I put all that behind me and I’ve moved on”
Well now such ‘wankers’ ( I pray) are going to find it just a tad more difficult to walk away and ignore their mistakes, bad beahivour, and doing the wrong thing by others, sometime with little more than saying “don’t blame me mate, it was just business!”.
Hopefully they are not among Steve’s ‘unjustified winners” !
‘those who ignore history are surely bound to repeat it’s mistakes’
Boy aren’t they making some new doozies for future generations to look back upon !
January 26th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
hi bullturnedbear,
you are wright to think that the bailouts wont work. nouriel roubini was recently quoted as saying that in his estimation the totel level of toxic debt in the US system is anywhere between 3 and 4 trillion dollars. write now the american government has committed themselves to around 1.5 to 2 trillion which includes the stimulas plan. governments invariably get program costings woefully wrong. whats the bet that they will need to spend 2 to 3 times more than they think it will cost.
and thats not the only problem. i get the feeling that not only will they need to bail out the people that need bailing out but also the people that dont need any bail out. the people who arnt going under wont spend unless their debt burden is eased as well. its the only fair thing to do in the interests of social stability. why should only the incompetant be rewarded.
so the problem in the US may not be a 3 trillion dollar problem but a 10 trillion dollar problem. how you fix that in less than 10 to 5 years atleast is going to take a lot of clever thinking. offcourse they could get the zibabweyan treasury involved and clear that 10 trillion in a matter of days. wonder what a 10 trillion dollar note would look like
January 26th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
BTW, I am aware from a comment made in an email a while back that Melissa Ketchell reads this blog. Melissa, if you’re reading this, will you commit to publishing an article on the real situation of the Brisbane housing market, using my figures from the DNRW and ABS, if my June qtr 08 forecast is accurate?
January 26th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
I was talking today to someone who lived through the Depression and the following observations are insightful.
1. People who owned their own home and had no debts found it difficult – but got by
2. People who didn’t own a house or had large debts found it very tough and suffered the most
3. Crime rates rose dramatically (mostly in the cities) as people became more desperate
4. Men would take “any” job to feed their families – often having to live away from home
5. Most people didn’t have that much before the Depression – so tougher times were not such a shock to the psyche
6. Today’s generation are in for a dramatic shock – the coming change of lifestyle will create enormous societal problems
7. The personal debt burden today is much greater – so the coming depression will be much harder
January 26th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
Many keep referring to the notion that it is possible to inflate out way out of this problem. How many of you have heard someone explain how that will work practically? Yes, in theory it is a great idea to inflate our way out of this. But practically it can’t be done.
Credit destruction has been far far far greater that money creation so far. As the deflation accelerates explain how money creation will swamp credit destruction? The numbers for actual and potential credit destruction are astronomical.
Inflation is coming again, but the question is how long until we see it in a significant way?
My tip is hard deflation for two years in Australia followed by muted inflation and stagnant growth for many years to come.
Theory will not fix this problem.
January 26th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Thanks Stats W,
I find that kind of practical info very helpful.
Being cautious at this time is very smart.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Just out of interest, how many people here have savings that could keep them going for months or years if they were to have no income for an extended period? By “savings” I don’t mean equity in your home, superannuation, or other illiquid assets, I mean cash or similar.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
carbonsink said,
‘how many people here have savings that could keep them going for months or years if they were to have no income for an extended period?
No problem Carbonsink. On a farm here and can grow most of my food and assuming we have deflation I would be right for quite some time. That said, people have to eat and so they need the likes of me.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Hi mahaish,
This kind of thing makes me suspicious http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1655001.ece
A respected chancellor and now prime minister deliberately pushes the gold price down and sells half the country’s reserves to China? What is this? Alice in Wonderland?
As long as UK, China and other such countries locked into the dollar system have an interest in upholding the dollar I reluctantly suspect such activities to continue, or I am estimating these people’s intellect to highly.
By the way, Steve et al, have you read a book called “The Dollar Crisis: Causes, Consequences and Cures” by Richard Duncan? It was published in 2003 and also foretold the crisis, and he also advocates minimum wages as a solution.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
carbonsink said,
‘how many people here have savings that could keep them going for months or years if they were to have no income for an extended period?
We sold the house in early/mid 2007 and have kept it in cash. I guess we could go for at least 10 years without working and still living pretty well. Maybe 20 years living simply.
Say No to inflation though
January 26th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
hi steve,
another reason the general price level increase idea wont work. the markets will price in our currency at a much lower level well before the policy is actually enacted, so the relative value of our debt if it needs to be paid in another currency other than ours , will go up. we will be back to square one. we would need to bring in excchange controls
January 26th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
‘Stats Watcher’, ‘Halcyon’ et al, that’s been among my quiet messages (amongst all the technical stuff) for some time now.
6. Today’s generation are in for a dramatic shock – the coming change of lifestyle will create enormous societal problems
3. Crime rates rose dramatically (mostly in the cities) as people became more desperate
“On a farm(let) here and can grow most of my food……..”
Remember all, there are two aspects ( at least)
to this drama, the ‘technical’ and the ‘social’
and as and when the technical plays out -
outside of the control of most of us –
it is the ‘social’( and political) that will dominate and that might be even harder to predict and might even have the bigger surprises !
January 26th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
hi frank,
you are right. central bankers have been manipulating the gold price for 80 years. gold is money. it is an alternative currency that poses a major threat to the legitamacy of all currencies . it is the only threat to the US dollar at present atleast until china and india get their act together.
right now governments can manipulate the price because they have enough reserves to meet the gap between supply and demand. but the situation is trending against them. there is a gap between the price of physical gold as appossed to virtual gold promises. people would rather hold the real physical assett as oppossed to virtual promises.
how long central bankers can control the supply demand gap depends on how long it will take them to debase their currencies and what event as a consequence of this debasement will stampede the herd towards gold. there is lot less gold than there is currency. the fundamentals of gold in both its intrinsic monetary and industrial commodity aspects are very sound in the long term. either way gold is heading up, but not for a while.
in a funny way a similar phenomenon is occuring with oil. producers are hoarding physical oil. countries like iran are storing oil in supertankers at the moment in the expectation of the oil price going up . the thing is they dont need to actually hold the physical oil, they could get the same result by playing the futures market.
again its this trend away from credit driven virtual promises to hard physical assetts
January 26th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Calvin & Hobbes: Prescient Analysis of the Global Crisis
http://i39.tinypic.com/15xs8t0.jpg
Very funny and very true ….
January 26th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Remember that the so called “unemployment” are absolute BS. The so called unemployed are divided into the whole popoulation that is of workage (14.1 million) regardless of whether they wanna work or not or even can. Of course they don’t count those not working out of that as “unemployed”. Governments, sheesh.
The total actually employed in the 2006 census was around 9.1 million with around 650K unemployed as of 9/08. If you divide the total that “presumably” want to work since they bothered to register with Job Network (around 9.75 million) by the so call unemplyed of 650K you get what I believe is a truer unemployment rate of 6.7% certainly truer than 4.3% as of 9/08. This, of course, does not count those that could not be bothered to register or are underemployed. See:
http://www.workplace.gov.au/lmip/EmploymentData?cid=JNPopulationByUnemploymentDuration%7CESAHome%7CNational%7CESA%7Canon%7CJob%20Network
The “official” US unemployment stats are at 7.2 but considering the above (non registration and under employment) some respected commentators put the true rate of unemployment at more than 11%. The US unemployment rate is at least more honest than ours in that it calculates it as I did (those officially out of work/total willing to be employed*100). If this can be extrapolated to Australia (“official unemployment” plus 50%) our true unemployment rate is more like 10%.
That’s why I simply laugh when people write in to such august journals as the Melbourne Herald Sun and say that more 95% of people are employed so why concentrate on the bad news? Hopefully that fella has read this and now understands why we concentrate on the bad because the so called good is a pack of lies.
The reasons I believe that house prices are coming down before we see any real “increase” in the employment rate are: Smart people are staying out of that market, they can see what is coming. Less competition equals a smaller sale price.
Also what we are seeing at the moment is that two income familes are being reduced to one and full time jobs are being lost to part time jobs meaning those that are leveraged hard are having to sell up those “illiquid” assets as they have less income to pay off debt.
Where I live is truly amazing to see. We got the boom about 12 months ago and the average price of a house was around 275K. Damn I should have sold, we talked about it about 15 months ago as we (I really lol) forsaw this but we really like our little period house and that won over in the end. So we are now deveraging as much as we can and spending money on the house to make it livable for the next 10 years or so. It has now dropped to 210K (the average). Our area is one of the more “affordable”. It is worse at the higher end.
And I join others that have reflected on the social cost. The increase in the crime rate is natural when one needs to commit crime to survive. While this has been a fascinating intelluctual exercise it will take a real toll in human terms and this concerns me more than anything.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Hi mahaish
I think the general idea is sound. People will want to store their savings in something they believe in, and also international trade will need regulation to prevent trade imbalances, something the gold standard offered. However, I am just not convinced gold will be the chosen path. There seems to be a growing sentiment that some kind of new world order will emerge from the failure of this capitalism as we have known it, and at is center will probably be some global regulations on international finance, with one aim of limiting trade imbalances. I don’t think they’ll adopt a gold standard, don’t ask me why, it’s just a feeling. Keynes proposed some kind of global bank that provided incentives to clear both trade surpluses and deficits, at the end of WWII I think. My guess is that governments will look at something like that.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:35 pm
Hi Chrisp
That Hobbes and Calvin strip just sums it all up! Brilliant.
And thanks Al49er for your tips about solving my trouble in logging in a few days ago.
This blog moves on so quickly. Blink and you might miss something!
January 26th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
hi steve,
got a couple of questions for you.
peter costello when ever he was asked about the debt always refered to the debt servicing ratio and that there wasnt a problem with the debt because the debt servicing ratio was very managable and that our net assett position was very sound. would love to get an article from you about this.
also im curious as to exactly how much real physical australian dollars are floating around in the ecomony. i assume its only a small fraction of the total level of spending.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Carbonsink and others, what do you think about the “value” of income protection insurance? Any protection at all from the worst case scenario?
January 27th, 2009 at 12:54 am
hi frank ,
your right . what ever the solution it will need a co ordinated global response.
what we are in the middle of is a transition of power from the US and the west to china and india. its going to take another 20 to 30 years before the chinese and a little later for the indians before they can claim global economic and military dominance and assuming that they can get their own house in order. if past transitions are anything to go by its going to be messy . witness what transpired between 1913 and 1949 when england lost its claim to economic and military predominance.there werent many slow news days then. the next 30 years if you and i are still alive there are going to be 3 words permanantly engraved into our psychi. economic collapse, revolution and war(hopefully not global nuclear war). as a general rule im betting on things getting more unstable and violent over the next 20 years.
the middle east is going through a transition from feudalism to modernity. the theologians and monarchs that run that part of the world are all going to feel the heat of massive political change. they are probably going to do it in a 100 years(im back dating to the 70s). we took 300 years from the start of the industrial revolution. it hasnt been a picnic. its going to be messy.
the russians another country thats lost its empire with enormous untapt wealth. whats the bet they are going to use that wealth to try and establish some sort of dominance over its neighbors and former citizens. former empires are always looking for means to re establish themselves to their former glory. its going to be messy.
and them we have the USA. what will they do . will they lick their wounds and go into their shell or are they going to come out swinging likee some drunken prize fighter. im betting that they havnt finished picking fights with a few people yet. they will be trying to keep the other global pirates at bay .
the chinese have an interesting curse” may you live in interesting times”. we are entering a HOT period in history. gold is going up in the long run , a long way up.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:06 am
Hi mahaish
Do you really think that China and India are going to experience wealth and power shifting their way? I hear it a lot from all kinds of people, but I have reservations. My take on China is that it is one half of the current financial crisis’s coin. They, along with other trade deficit USA trade partners, have been for a long time tied to the dollar, in more ways than one. Perhaps less so nowadays. How can China maintain growth without developing its domestic economy quickly? How can China quickly develop domestic consumption? At least their command economy has the advantage of being able to quickly put in social policy such as minimum wages. But when will they do this, and how quickly can they set up the conditions to get the resources they need? It seems possible but unlikely in the short term. I think China is going to be battling social unrest for the next few years.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:07 am
Hi All
I think Alan Kohler ‘has got it!’ Did any of you read his article in yesterday’s Business Spectator ‘MAKE AUSTRALIA WORK – The crisis is just beginning’ http://www.BusinessSpectator.com.au
He makes some interesting points on the recession and the losses of money in Super (an issue that is close to my heart):
‘Up until about a week ago Australia was sleepwalking towards recession, in denial that the global recession would affect us’.
‘Up until just the past few days the general proposition from politicians and many economists has seemed to be that it hasn’t affected us so far, so it won’t.’
‘Or that our banks are in good shape, so we’ll be okay.’
‘Or China will save us.’
‘Or our house prices are not like those in the UK and the US and won’t decline because there is a shortage of them here.’
‘Or there’s nothing we can do anyway.’
‘It has been a curious mixture of complacency and fatalism: Australia is the rabbit in the headlights of the global financial crisis, convinced that the car won’t hit us.’
‘Worse still we are badly unprepared. We harvested a resources boom and spent the lot.’
‘With house prices still high and unemployment still low, the only way in which the global financial crisis has affected us so far is through the sharemarket, but that’s been dramatic: it has fallen 50 per cent – more than the US and more than the rest of the world as a whole.’
‘That is a wake-up call in itself. The market is telling us that Australia is far from immune from the crisis and, in fact, is likely to be harder hit than the US, where it all started.’
‘So as they wait to see what will happen to the value of their houses, Australians have seen their other main asset – super – collapse. In this they have been badly let down by the combination of mandatory retirement saving, the shift of market risk from institutions to individuals and a financial system that is dysfunctional and conflicted. During the bull market, all vestiges of “defined benefit” superannuation were removed. Twenty years ago it was the most common form of retirement benefit, providing retirees with certainty.’
‘But companies and governments have used the opportunity of the bull market to shed the risks inherent in that and moved their employees onto accumulation-style super, where the retiree gets the benefit of the market but also takes the risk. It was great while the boom lasted, and those who cashed out before November 2007 did well. But most did not. Even those who retired before that date kept their money in the market through private pension plans, usually sold by financial planners skimming off exorbitant fees.’
‘Now the sharemarket has fallen 50 per cent and retirement incomes and savings have vaporised. From the industry that sold the investment products that government policy forced everyone to buy, it’s “all care, no responsibility”’.
I think Alan Kohler ‘has got it!’ Can’t say the same for so-called financial advisers. They’re still parroting the same tired old company line as in a Letter to the Editor in the Weekend Australian 24-25 January 2009: ‘…in the case of investments in managed funds and quality Australian shares held by super funds, nothing is lost until you sell. If you had purchased all your direct holding in any of the Big Four Australian banks in late 2008, and you sold them now, you would lose about 50 per cent of your funds. But if you sell nothing and they recover, and in time they, the banks, always do, you will lose nothing.’ He was savaged by replies in yesterday’s Australian. One reply, ’Investors in Babcock and Brown, ABC Learning, Centro Properties and a host of similar financial cot cases have already lost everything – they have nothing left to sell’.
As Steve commented on January 24th: ‘On the savers and super front, I think the latter is largely doomed no matter what–massive losses on shares and property will ultimately be crystallised. Savers, on the other hand, would do quite well out of a debt write-down in the context of overall deflation.’
January 27th, 2009 at 6:50 am
Agreed Mahaish which is why I prefer debt moratoria. Japan could have followed the wage increase route with no danger because its debt is national. The current crisis would require coordinated international wage rises, which is even harder to imagine than achieving them here. On the other hand unilateral debt repudiations are feasible–and they will ultimately happen no matter how much they offend people’s ideas of proper diplomacy.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:45 am
Again, please tell me how I would pay my employees more. Would the banks supply my business with free money? I’m from the old-fashioned school where businesses pay their employees out of revenue, which is shrinking across-the-board at the moment.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:56 am
Kohler has “got it” for a long time. Here’s more evidence in today’s Business Spectator: Unimaginable wealth destruction
January 27th, 2009 at 8:12 am
That’s why the issue is more and more about the MALDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH as opposed to the process of debt forgiveness. There is more wealth now than at any time in the past….why are we having these financial problems??…people need to think about this logically!!
January 27th, 2009 at 9:16 am
A few more tips on how to prepare on a personal level from “The Automatic Earth” site: “How to build a lifeboat”
http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/2008/11/debt-rattle-november-30-2008-how-to.html
January 27th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Hi Steve,
Seems like Bill Gates and Balmer are intelligent guys. Bill Gates expects a recession lasting a decade http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/gates-predicts-10-years-of-woe/2009/01/27/1232818386171.html.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Apologies if this is off-topic, but I thought the following was an excellent debate regarding (hyper)inflation vs deflation:
http://nihoncassandra.blogspot.com/2009/01/inflation-v-deflation.html
I’m in the camp that believes that there is likely to be massive social and economic collapses (particularly in the US) which will result in a breakdown of faith in fiat currencies — which will have the same effects as hyper inflation. I think this will start in ernest from mid-2009 but that’s guesswork.
But short of civil unrest the deflation arguement is hard to falter from a purely economic perspective. Interestingly, I think Australia won’t experience a social collapse like the US. Our population is extremely docile and our authoritarian institutions enjoy unconscious moral support.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Hi Steve,
Did you have a look at todays 27th business spectator blogs? It seems more and more people are now agreeing with you and your analysis. Unfortunately, they still will not give you the credit and stealing the show.
Enjoyed Alan Kohlers article-The crisis is just begining
>>Up until just the past few days the general proposition from politicians and many economists has seemed to be that it hasn’t affected us so far, so it won’t.
Or that our banks are in good shape, so we’ll be okay.
Or China will save us.
Or our house prices are not like those in the UK and the US and won’t decline because there is a shortage of them here.
Or there’s nothing we can do anyway.
It has been a curious mixture of complacency and fatalism: Australia is the rabbit in the headlights of the global financial crisis, convinced that the car won’t hit us<<
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Brace-for-a-20-trillion-write-down-$pd20090127-NN QY6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-brThe-crisis-is-just-beginnin g-$pd20090126-NMSFP?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-br-Dont-ignore-hidden-unemplo y-$pd20090127-NNRN6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Worse-than-Rudd-knows-$pd20090123-NK57E?OpenDocum ent&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORKbr-Repairing-massive-capital-d a-$pd20090126-NN2GN?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Alan-Oster-$pd20090122-NHT58?OpenDocument&src=sph
January 27th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Hi Steve,
Did you have a look at todays 27th Jan business spectator? Looks like everyone has switched sides and is on board with you. Unfortunately they will not give you the credit and posing as smart axxes.
I enjoyed Alan Kohlers article-The crisis is just begining
>>Up until just the past few days the general proposition from politicians and many economists has seemed to be that it hasn’t affected us so far, so it won’t.
Or that our banks are in good shape, so we’ll be okay.
Or China will save us.
Or our house prices are not like those in the UK and the US and won’t decline because there is a shortage of them here.
Or there’s nothing we can do anyway.
It has been a curious mixture of complacency and fatalism: Australia is the rabbit in the headlights of the global financial crisis, convinced that the car won’t hit us<<
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Brace-for-a-20-trillion-write-down-$pd20090127-NN QY6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-brThe-crisis-is-just-beginnin g-$pd20090126-NMSFP?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-br-Dont-ignore-hidden-unemplo y-$pd20090127-NNRN6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Worse-than-Rudd-knows-$pd20090123-NK57E?OpenDocum ent&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORKbr-Repairing-massive-capital-d a-$pd20090126-NN2GN?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Alan-Oster-$pd20090122-NHT58?OpenDocument&src=sph
January 27th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Hi Steve,
My comments are lost. I tried to repost but the repost was also lost. What is going on?
January 27th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Steve,
I am shocked to read the business spectator today 27th Jan and see so many journalist switch sides. Unfortunately none of them give you any credit and are posing as scholars.
I enjoyed Alan Kohlers article-The crisis is just begining
>>Up until just the past few days the general proposition from politicians and many economists has seemed to be that it hasn’t affected us so far, so it won’t.
Or that our banks are in good shape, so we’ll be okay.
Or China will save us.
Or our house prices are not like those in the UK and the US and won’t decline because there is a shortage of them here.
Or there’s nothing we can do anyway.
It has been a curious mixture of complacency and fatalism: Australia is the rabbit in the headlights of the global financial crisis, convinced that the car won’t hit us<<
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Brace-for-a-20-trillion-write-down-$pd20090127-NN QY6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-brThe-crisis-is-just-beginnin g-$pd20090126-NMSFP?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-br-Dont-ignore-hidden-unemplo y-$pd20090127-NNRN6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Worse-than-Rudd-knows-$pd20090123-NK57E?OpenDocum ent&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORKbr-Repairing-massive-capital-d a-$pd20090126-NN2GN?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Alan-Oster-$pd20090122-NHT58?OpenDocument&src=sph
January 27th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
I enjoyed Alan Kohlers article-The crisis is just begining
>>Up until just the past few days the general proposition from politicians and many economists has seemed to be that it hasn’t affected us so far, so it won’t.
Or that our banks are in good shape, so we’ll be okay.
Or China will save us.
Or our house prices are not like those in the UK and the US and won’t decline because there is a shortage of them here.
Or there’s nothing we can do anyway.
It has been a curious mixture of complacency and fatalism: Australia is the rabbit in the headlights of the global financial crisis, convinced that the car won’t hit us<<
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-brThe-crisis-is-just-beginnin g-$pd20090126-NMSFP?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORK-br-Dont-ignore-hidden-unemplo y-$pd20090127-NNRN6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /Worse-than-Rudd-knows-$pd20090123-NK57E?OpenDocum ent&src=sph
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article /MAKE-AUSTRALIA-WORKbr-Repairing-massive-capital-d a-$pd20090126-NN2GN?OpenDocument&src=sph
January 27th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
Hi Evan,
Why does “social unrest and economic collapse lead to a breakdown in faith in fiat currencies”?
To lose faith in fiat suggests a switch to another form of exchange. What other means of exchange does the world switch to overnight?
Social unrest and economic collapse destroys wealth, money and currency. When nobody has any money or wealth left, why will they lose faith in it? It is the opposite that holds. When there is too much money, its value is diluted and people seek other assets that will hold their value better.
The opposite to your suggestion is intuitive. When wealth is totally destroyed, the little bit left has enormous buying power. Everyone wants to get their hands on it because they have no buying power in their own hands.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Hi Steve,
A lot of journalist have been switching sides and are now sailing with Steve. Unfortunately, none of them have given him any credit or even acknowledged him instead are posing as smart economic pros.
I enjoyed Alan Kohlers article-The crisis is just begining
>>Up until just the past few days the general proposition from politicians and many economists has seemed to be that it hasn’t affected us so far, so it won’t.
Or that our banks are in good shape, so we’ll be okay.
Or China will save us.
Or our house prices are not like those in the UK and the US and won’t decline because there is a shortage of them here.
Or there’s nothing we can do anyway.
It has been a curious mixture of complacency and fatalism: Australia is the rabbit in the headlights of the global financial crisis, convinced that the car won’t hit us<<
Brace-for-a-20-trillion-write-down
The-crisis-is-just-beginnin
Worse-than-Rudd-knows-
January 27th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Some anecdotes on the Great Depression.
In 1933 my father left school at age 15 and entered the workforce on the small family farm and also did some blade shearing. One comment he repeated many times was that no one had any money. At the end of the Depression though it was like someone had flicked a switch: suddenly there was some money being spent. Obviously people had emergency money and when confidence returned they started to spend again. There were plenty of people moving around looking for work and one fellow wanted work ringbarking trees, the trouble being that he only had a mattock to do the job with – couldn’t afford to buy an axe.
At one stage the family sold some topsoil and received threepence a cubic yard for it and were very pleased to get the money. I’ve got no idea what that is in inflation adjusted money today. An old timer came to get hay one day and produced cash from a bulging wallet. On being asked why he carried so much cash he said that they were so short of money in the Depression that it just felt a lot more comfortable to him to have his hands on cash now.
Will it get that bad this time ’round? Who knows. Unemployment got to 29% in Aust. then, but our economy was much more heavily dependent on primary production than it is now which is a plus. On the other side of the ledger is that according to figures Steve had in earlier postings our Debt to GDP figures are much worse this time.
The point I mentioned earlier about the money coming out at the end of the Depression makes me think what thickheads they are in Treasury and Canberra to think that their insignificant stimulus packages using our money will make any difference. When the populace is scared spending is the last thing it will do.
All sorts of regulations will come into existence now to make sure this doesn’t happen again, but it will. Happens on average every three generations. Regulations are bought in when they are needed least and removed when they are needed most. 40-50 years down the track when all the managers who have lived through this are retired the bright young things at the cutting edge will find ways to work around any remaining regulations and the cycle will repeat itself. When that happens they will of course know a lot more of how the economy and markets behave and won’t repeat the mistakes of their grandparents. That’s what they always think.
January 27th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Ballmer might get it but allot of other people don’t!! I just caught this report
“Likewise, its measure of business confidence rose 10 points from November’s record low to stand at -20 in December. “It’s evidence that the government’s fiscal spending initiatives improved business conditions and confidence in the month, with the largest bounces in retail, wholesale and the discretionary spending parts of the service sector,” said Alan Oster, group chief economist at NAB.”
http://money.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=733467
With $10 billion of government money they got the confidence meter up to -20!!! Good work Kev, I’m sure we’re through the worst of this now.
January 27th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
I just read on The Auto Earth that at one stage during the GD. Bank withdrawals in the US were limited to $10 at a time.
Great way to avoid a run on the banks. Similar restriction coming to a bank near you!!!
January 27th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
If super is doomed what do you do? cut your loses and convert to cash assuming your fund allows this or just let it be if you have 20+ years to go? Any idea guys?
January 27th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
How deep might this Govt send Australia into debt, handing out taxpayer treasure “help” Australians and “save” Australia from the big bad GFC?
“A weaker economy, more industry bailouts and more stimulus packages are likely to push the Federal budget into a $40 billion deficit in the 2009-10 financial year, the National Australia Bank says.”
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/business/40b-budget-deficit-looms/1417410.aspx
We don’t want to go down the path of Latin America soliciting a bond collapse as markets discount the ability of our Govt to deliver on it’s debt. I’m certain that the years ahead will require plenty of dry powder to offset the worst effects of the economic decline that is to come. Those pre-Xmas gift vouchers that were handed out may end up being seen as frivolous and irresponsible when stacked up against the hardships headed our way.
January 27th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
I am no great stakes in the world of finance and I don’t have much super – I haven’t worked for other people enough. But it never seemed likely to me that I would ever get my super. I have always assumed the government, in the long term, would keep stepping in to impose conditions on removing super until it wasn’t that great anyway.
In 4 years time I can take it out and I will. I’d much rather look after my own financial affairs.
If I were younger and had to wait or be penalised I’d probably transfer everything to a conservative plan and revisit if another bubble comes around.
But I’m not actually doing that with my own money. Using your own money has a way of changing behaviour.
January 27th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
Steve and others,
It looks like everyone here agrees that property values are heading south (30-50%).
What about the value of new cars? I am in the market for a new vehicle and wonder if it may not be worth waiting 6-12 months if prices are going to fall.
I will probably end up getting an imported model – and would be very interested as to your thoughts on what will happen. Do you think prices will fall or will we just see a sharp drop off in production by car makers as they try to maintain prices.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
I moved my super to 100% cash in April 08. All I had to do was log in to my (big industry) super fund website, click the cash option, and it was there the next day.
Over the next few years, if there’s ever a sign of an end to this madness, I plan to move some of it back into shares. Right now though I think the downside risks are bigger than any upside.
Reading Steve Keen’s blog on a daily basis is not helping with my helping with my optimism!
January 27th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Stats Watcher do you have to get a new car? There will be plenty of forced sales of near new cars in the months to come and no doubt some great bargains. Mind you considering the state of the new car market there will be sales of new cars also. I know for a fact that 3 Toyota dealers have already dropped out. The exchange rate could be the elephant in the room and I have no idea where the dollar is headed.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
I agree with ‘Halcyon’ , ‘Stats Watcher’, unless it’s the work write off, ‘new’ cars are rarely good value, but by the 2nd half of the year (if not earlier), the dealers will be picking you up in a limo to take you to their den to flog you the best value new or used car purchase you will ever make.
Please though don’t get a 4 whell drive – your ego can’t be that big !
January 27th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
joshua
See what your Super Fund’s Cash Interest Rate is. After a lot of questioning of my so-called financial adviser he finally found out that Cash in my Allocated Pension Fund only paid 1.9% Cash, which seemed to be a surprise to him as his exact words were: “1 year is 1.9% (after fees) which I have to admit is not competitive (we have tried to ascertain why it is so low but with no luck.” Read “I really can’t be bothered finding out!!”
Because mine was an Allocated Pension I was able to withdraw the whole lot and most of it is in a Term Deposit for 6 months at a much better rate than 1.9%, and I haven’t a clue what I’ll do in 6 months time.
You won’t be able to withdraw your money from Super at this stage unless you fulfil certain conditions, but you should be able to move to Cash in your Fund as Carbonsink advises. Don’t expect a nice big Interest Rate, but like me, you’ll no doubt sleep better at night.
January 27th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Hi Joshua,
I believe the share market will bottom before the macro economy bottoms. I also believe the markets have a long way to go yet. Based on history though. When the market hits both temporary bottoms and major bottoms it’s almost impossible to jump in and buy shares. The reason is that almost everybody is doom and gloom. Most feel the market will keep falling.
If you watch the market for the next few months you will see this in action. I believe there will be a temporary “new” bottom in the next two months. After that the market will be due for a large multi-month rally. This will happen despite the fact that the news in the macro economy will continue to worsen. The market will rally and the bulls will feed off each other.
After several months of that rally. I think the market will then fall off the cliff and find a devastating new low. This is all based on the Elliot wave theory and analysis.
Ultimately the market will make a major low. The market will then start a recovery and may test but not breach that low again. The problem is that the major low will look like the temporary lows and most will come to think that the new low will be breached to the downside like all the others.
All that’s not to helpful other than to say that at some time in a couple of years it will be worth switching back to shares. At the moment it is probably a good idea to switch to cash quickly.
January 27th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
More on Super,
I manage my own fund. Since January I have been between 80% and 90% cash with the remainder shorting the DOW and the Naz.
My problem is this. Once the crisis starts to mature, I fear I will not be able to trust cash in a bank.
Super rules will not allow me to withdraw cash and put it in a safe deposit box. If bailouts get too big I will not trust Govt bonds either.
I think equities will continue to decline and at some point the counterparty risk will make me to afraid to even short the market.
Any ideas on how I can stay within the law but also protect my super?
January 27th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
hi frank,
you raise some interesting issues.
average income in china is around $6000 in purchasing price parity terms, average income in the US is around $48000. more than 40% of the labour force is employed in agriculture, in the US less than 2%. its going to take till 2040 atleast to acheive pre emminence assumming they dont suffer any internal set backs .
and thats the big question isnt it. the US had its war of independence, civil war , indian war, mexican war etc etc. it had to deal with the robber barons. alot of blood was spilt on the way to being a global super power.
can the chinese government maintain political control and maintain the frantic pace of modernisation without people wanting a bigger say , eg democracy. also we were lucky that the US took the mantle from the british so they inherited alot of their ideas about the rule of law. china doesnt have that tradition, so they are going to have to come up with something thats exceptable to all of us or we wont do business with them unless they decide to use a lot of gun boat diplomacy like the US has done.
chinas percentage of public debt is about one quater of the US.
its rate of investment is 2 and a half times that of the US. its growth rate in good and bad times is up to 5 times greater than the US.
even with all these positives china still needs to be able to stimulate domestic demand and wage growth
its starting from way behind but i think its going to win the race
one big problem that stands in its way is bretton woods and its consequences. gold or no gold standard we have US dollar hegemony where world trade and finance is done in US dollars. the US goverernment has stiched us all up including china. in essence china is unable to exploit fully any comparitive advantage in trade against the US due to dollar hegmony.
any surpluses it might have are denominated in US dollars. it can do several things with these surpluses. firstly it has to keep some of it in reserve to protect itself against currency attacks and movements that would undermine its own currency and trading position, allthough its currency isnt traded in the market. secondly it needs to reinvest these surpluses, hence the rise of these huge sovereign wealth funds. alot of there surplus dollars are re invested back into the US capital account in the form investments into the debt and equity markets, since there are restrictions on them purchasing hard US assetts. its quite a scam the US are running. and they think they can get away with it again with these huge deficits they are creating , expecting foreigners to bail them out through the capital account.
you may have a point. maybe the only way the chinese are going to get pre emminence is if the US collapses from within and it no longer has the economic and more importantly the military power to jawbone everybody else into doing thing its way.
at the end of world war one britain was still a creditor nation.it wasnt until the end of world war two plus 5 years that the british empire was finally all lost
at the end of world war two the US was the worlds largest creditor nation by far. it had achieved military pre emminence. everybody else was broke.
now its the the largest debtor. its still a financial empire due to the dollar hegemony. history has taught us that empires come and empires go . 9/11 was the first i think in long series of global military and economic skirmishes that is going to bring this empire down.
i think it actually may be an externality as economists would refer to it thats actually going to unravel the dollar hegemony and the US finacial empire. a conflict in the middle east , a conflict in the far east. take your pick. it might take 2 to 3 decades to unravel though.
January 27th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Thanks guys for the advice.
Should you be concerned if your super portfolio is < 30K and it has tanked by 15%. Shouldnt the super be able to buy shares at a cheaper price so it evens out after all if you are looking at a timespan of 25 to 30 years? Is this amount to little to be concerned?
A decade of downturn means that probably nothing will be left. A year and a half back I converted from balanced to high growth:)
My bro had a portfolio of around 80K and it has tanked by 20K so for him it is a different bal game because he stands more to loose and he has a mortgage of 500K.
I am feeling really miserable because my company is planning to outsource our jobs to manila. We have to train those guys to ultimately replace us. There are no jobs in the IT industry.
Atleast I dont have and debt because I live with my bro offset his mortgage with my savings that is quite significant. I doubt it he will ever be able to pay it off. Maybe the banks will come after my offset account. I have set aside purchasing my own house because I would like to help him out and he has a 5 bedroom house.
I used to get crap a lot from people that you cannot do this in Australia but joint families was so common in our culture and we will go out of our way for each other. I think moving back to live with family wont be a strange notion anymore.
January 27th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
hey bullturnedbear,
thank god our moneys made out of plastic and not bio degradable . if we run out of safety deposit boxes , how about under the vegie patch. im not a keen gardner though, allthough i have an uneasy feeling i need to become one if this thing ends up being a total train wreck
January 27th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Hi Bullturnedbear,
If severe social unrest leads to the disintegration of a government then the fiat currency it issues becomes worthless overnight. If this happens on a wide scale then there could be a collapse in the faith of fiat currencies across the globe. Unlikely perhaps but a possibility. I think the US in particular is in a fairly advanced stage of collapse so the world needs a new reserve currency at the very least.
A productive hobby farm land and 100 ounces of gold could soon be more valuable than a Manhattan penthouse.
January 27th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Hi mahaish
I watched the news for Chinese investments and diversification from USD based holdings. They have been making great attempts (even valiant perhaps) to get out of this dollar deadlock. For example, their relationship with Brazil I think, or other South American countries, for resources. One thing that really struck me though was what they were doing with Africa. Did you hear about their investments in DRC? They basically agreed to swap some millions of tonnes of minerals (Copper and Cobalt I think) for development of an almost completely new national infrastructure: thousands of kilometres of rail, road, hospitals, modern universities, the works. This kind of model of direct investment is I much more aligned with the kind of authoritarian diktat that goes on in Africa, and seems to have more potential than the Western ‘aid’ model, which comes with moral and social strings attached. However, the result, or perhaps the result was rather disturbing: The Americans created Africom (www.Africom.mil), which came into effect near the end of 2008, with the aim of supplying “security” to African states for mutual economic development. Perhaps the same kind of “security” as Saudi Arabia and Iraq enjoy…that is access to US military hardware in exchange for dollar oil pricing and pro-US resource access biases. Also, we watched the emergence of a rebel movement in DRC. I have heard from some people in Kenya for example, that the recent civil war was to a large extent precipitated not by tribal differences (though that exacerbated the situation), but by a fundamental difference in alignment between the political parties – ie pro China versus pro American. It seems to me that Africa is the scene for an under-the-radar cold war between China and the US over the role of the dollar. Perhaps if China had been facilitated in a spirit of cooperation in its endeavours to extract minerals from Africa the financial crisis we have now could have been avoided.
January 27th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Mahaish
Actually….that makes me think though…what’s Oz’s role in the above picture I painted? Oz is also mineral rich. What is Oz doing with China?
January 27th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Mahaish
Christ almighty! Sorry for the stream of posts, but I just had a realisation. If deflation sets in in places like Oz, and credit is hard to come buy, and labour costs drop, then presumably China’s CIC would be more than welcome to step in and create thousands of new jobs extracting cheap minerals from Oz right?? China could up its minimum wages, keep the factories open, and suck the land dry if it wants? Currencies will collapse, but the dollar will remain high while confidence in it as a reserve currency remains. Exports to US and others can be maintained to some extent, while it transitions to an economy more based on domestic consumption. It’s current account surpluses will deplete slowly, but it can ‘internationalise’ its currency and decouple from the dollar, open the way for more foreign investment…. Maybe Jim Rogers is right, maybe we should be long on Asia and short on USD….
January 27th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Sorry also for the string coming from one blogger whose post was stopped by the spam filter because it regarded the number of links as a worry! All four attempts to post this will be turning up pretty soon–I clicked “approve all” by mistake.
Cheers, Steve
January 28th, 2009 at 12:20 am
hi frank,
the problem for china is that no one trusts them , and they dont have the economic and military muscle to make people trust them like the US. nobody will want to be in yuan until china becomes the main game in town and they have excepted the rule of law. because politicians in the west dont trust them , they wont allow them to take stragic positions in their strategic industries. africa and the pacific, well they are fighting over crumbs really. its not the main game .
china needs to get big enough, wealthy enough and mean enough that it will be able to impose its will on the rest of us , financially and militarilly. the US is the old lion and its going to come up against the young lion, i dont think we are going to get a peacefull transition of power this time. you can forget about analysts being able to make long range forcasts about earnings, when this thing really gets going. its going to be ugly.
who was that guy, fukiyama, who wrote about the end of history. well ive got news for him. history like the climate is going to get a lot lot warmer
and for us aussies, we are going to have take sides this time,rather than sit on the fence. if we back the wrong guy we are in deep sh*t.
aussies have always been ahead of the curve when it comes to china. gough went communist china before anyone else. we have a mandarin speaking pm.
mandarin and hindi should be made compulsory in our school curriculum in about 20 years time
January 28th, 2009 at 12:59 am
Mahaish
True, true, the idea of conflict had occurred to me too. If social unrest develops in China to an extreme, the anger might be vented on an external, rather than on the central authority.
However, regarding your comments on the Yuan and strategic investments: would it necessarily have to be that way? I mean, first China holds a lot of dollars, which might remain strong for a while. The Oz dollar should decline in comparison. The opportunity costs of mining in Oz would doubly decrease then with deflation, so mining should become more prevalent. Does anyone need to know or care about where those dollars are coming from?
As for Africa, there is a lot there, untapped oil, and X billion dollars worth of copper doesn’t seem like crumbs to me.
Maybe I am overestimating the importance of resources to China, but I guess that great reductions in the cost of its inputs, along with an increase in minimum wages, should help it to develop its economy to be more based on domestic consumption. I don’t know though, someone would need to look at lots of data about China and work out what the change in prospects looks like according to expected declines in resource prices. Another thing too – as long as USD is relatively high, for some reason oil stays relatively low – there is a significant inverse relationship.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:50 am
Thanks guys for your thoughts on new cars.
Even the IMF has recognised that the world economy has stalled and China and India are not going to save us. However, they still say that 2010 will see a return to growth of 3% – hmm is that a pig I saw fly past my window.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24973302-601,00.html
Hi bullturnedbear – I do not see the next rally being of long duration (2 months at most) and it is unlikely to break through the current low if history is any guide.
If the market falls below 2700 I think all confidence will evaporate and any rallies will be short and out of sheer desperation.
Superannuation reporting will hit the mail boxes in February/March and workers/retirees are in for a big shock.
I moved my Super to cash at the end of September 2007 and I cannot see any reason to move back into property or stocks this year. If your Super fund does not have a cash option then maybe it is time to change funds.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:29 am
Hi Stats W’ya,
You may have missed my point. How does your fund define cash? A mix of bonds and managed funds (all digital entries). As yields approach zero at the short end, there is only one way for bonds to go. Down in value.
It is illegal to withdraw physical cash from your super (either into a safety deposit box or under the garden). Therefore one cannot escape the digital financial system with their super.
My tip is that the digital financial system will crash within a year or so. Unless I cheat or one of you smart cookies come up with a legal solution. My super will go the way of the do do.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:48 am
Hi Evan,
Please re-read my post on social unrest and economic collapse. I think you may have misread it. Your assumptions seem to be incorrect.
Further, currencies trade relative to each other. Therefore if one crashes its relative currency would rally.
What you are describing is hyper-inflation, whereby the buying power of all currencies falls. Hyper-inflation is the rapid expansion of the supply of money and credit. The opposite is happening at present as credit is being dramatically destroyed. Civil and economic collapse would further shrink the total supply of money and credit. Not expand it.
Finally, What if the $A crashes relative to all other currencies? Then our buying power in foreign goods crashes. Yes. But our buying power in local goods could still increase dramatically if the amount of remaining money supply (sum of money and credit) were dramatically reduced relative to the available local goods and services for sale.
You need to read some papers on inflation vs deflation. Don’t trust what Peter Schiff has been saying. His arguments don’t to seem to include all of the picture.
I saw Peter in an interview with Steve Keen several months ago and his argument was that the $US would crash and China and $A would forge ahead. He was a big believer in Decoupling. He called that incorrectly.
January 28th, 2009 at 4:29 am
I am starting to think stocks are in a bull market. The US housing market have already taken the bulk of the decline as sales are improving and the rate of decline probably will decrease when the statistics arrive, and the rate of the declines will slow from here. To the stock market and bank shares, that is the same as a turn around, meaning the market, and especially banking shares will go up, while foreclosures will go down.
I see it in banking shares. They have clearly reached a final low.
I am not sure if you get an inflationary or deflationary bull market, but it’s a bull market for American stocks getting started. I think will probably be good for emerging market’s if it’s an inflationary bull market. If it’s deflationary it will be an American only experience.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:08 am
Don’t know Bull, is an account at the Perth Mint allowed for super?? They offer free storage if you have over $50K, I know you won’t get any yield but if interest rates are zero it’s still competitive, and secure!!
January 28th, 2009 at 9:37 am
It is interesting to see the increased discussion about the rising level of instability especially relating to China and the US.
Another thing to keep in mind, is that the GFC
will not only change the ‘social’ dynamic in every country, it will also change the international dynamics.
The election of Obama I believe will be shown to mark a turning point in history of the relationship between the US and Australia. Despite a lot of media discussion to pinpoint connections or associations with Australia among the new US administration, Obama himself has little knowledge or I believe interest in this country, (particularly in the light of what he has on his plate to deal with), save for getting some hundreds more of our expert soldiers into Afghanistan. If that were not forthcoming he could start the process of questioning our credentials as a strong supportive allie.
Australia is a big ‘empty’ bowl of rich minerals and resources. America has an intractable level of debt largely held by China, Japan and the Middle East.
China needs space and resources. So that all those people who have revelled in the practice of ‘belting Uncle Sam’ might ask themselves, if forsaking Australia became part of a proposition for solving the US situation, how resilient now is the memory and attitude toward his country.
There are many many dimensions to this GFC, understandably most discussion concentrate on see economic and financial, was the number of us like every now and then to consider the sociological aspects; geopolitics will also prove both interesting and very very surprising in my humble estimation.
Not too much will remain the same.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Thanks Ned,
I am not too bullish gold. In fact I am quite bearish. I have a few problems with gold.
1. As demand for cash rises (due to deflation) people and nations will liquidate gold to raise cash. Seems counter to the mainstream view. I just believe that the deflationary forces will be much stronger than people realise.
2. Gold is priced and traded in $US and not $A. The price of gold and the currency can both move against Australian gold owners. That is a lot of complicated risk. They can both move in our favour too of course.
3. Gold is almost the last asset that is still in a bubble. Everything else has fallen. Gold seems to be the last to fall. Caveat, US bonds may be in a bubble. This is debatable due to deflationary forces as well.
The thing I don’t really get about gold is this. Everyone tells me that gold is “real money”. Yet to trade with gold you must convert it to cash. Nobody accepts gold as actual currency. People say this may change in the future.
Further, to bet on gold is a bet on inflation. When we have inflation again, I would rather own income producing properties than gold. I fear we are quite a way off that point though.
Thanks for the idea though. I have been thinking about this for a year and I’m not sure I can preserve my super with a high degree of certainty.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Hi Bullturnedbear,
Thanks for your critique. Rest assured that I have read many debates regarding inflation vs deflation and do not rely on Peter Schiff (or any individual for that matter) to determine my opinions. One of the most fascinating and instructive aspects of this global financial crisis is the fairly extreme divergence of the debate. Many people adopt a 19th century mindset speaks with great certainty though of course we’re all guessing.
I think the main point of difference between our arguments is that whereas you are describing a modification of the economic status quo I’m talking about a complete breakdown in the status quo in which all bets are off.
In your line of thinking you look to the past to predict the future, examine economic models to make forecasts, compare relative theories, etc. There’s nothing wrong with that. If I were to think that way then I agree that deflation is the likely outcome, particularly in the short to medium term.
However, either intentional efforts to destroy an economy from within or massive civil unrest may unglue the current economic paradigms. In the case of the US, what if Helicopter Ben starts printing an extra $2 trillion and gives it to the banks? No big deal as the banks won’t lend anyway (CDS will eat it all up and then some) so the velocity of money will be low enough to counteract any impact on inflation. But what if he prints $20 trillion and hands it out in cash to every US citizen directly. Surely that will lead to hyper-inflation using your standard economic models. What if he printed $50 trillion six months later. Too far fetched? Maybe. But if history is any guide then that is exactly what starts to happen when a government is in the process of advanced breakdown.
More to the point: what if US society completely implodes and the actual government doesn’t exist anymore, at least not in a capacity to enforce its currency through physical power? There will be a run up of hyper-inflation, yes, but that’s just the short term. In the medium and perhaps long term there is no fiat currency at all.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Joshua, I admire your loyalty and love to your brother – and while those links have been lost to a large degree in Australia (to the extent that we had them initially as a part of our Anglo culture?) – I am firmly of the view that we will see a turn back towards family and community ties as this economic strife worsens. So we will see a lot of families moving back in together, and helping to help ends meet. And I am sure that your loyalty will see you assisted as and when you need it.
With regards your super, sounds like you are very young and to be honest, I think that places you in a good position. Don’t worry at all about the minor $ amount that your super has gone down, rejoice in the fact that you are currently able to buy assets within super at prices that haven’t been seen in almost 10 years! And you might even get the chance to buy at even cheaper prices over the next few years.
Super has the advantage of being forced dollar cost averaging (as long as you are employed or otherwise able to make regular contributions) – it’s your decision on whether you want to average into cash (as some of the more bearish people here might suggest) at the moment or to buy risk assets.
The point that I would make is that, whilst it is true that even after the 1929 crash (and the GD) it took 25 years for the stockmarket to reach new highs, people young enough to buy in those years after the crash and hold through to that 25 year mark and beyond did very well.
Believe it or not, probably for anybody with a 25 year or more time horizon, the longer it stays low the better – and hopefully there will be a good bull run before you need those funds (ie. people have had enough time to unlearn the lessons they are learning now). Put it this way, if we were to see a repeat of the GD, this strategy will do quite well.
The other thing that I should say is that if one of your goals is to buy a home for yourself – after you help your brother – super may been seen as a sort of hedging strategy there. If things get really bad and super accounts really tank over the next decade or so, then those same conditions will see that any cash savings will buy a lot more of a house than they would if the governments of the world pulled rabbits out of their collective hats and somehow created the conditions for a strong, sustainable bounce in stock markets (which will strongly benefit super accounts with strong weightings to shares).
Ultimately, nobody knows what will happen – but having time on your side is a very great advantage right now (and the more time, the better). Imagine being 55+ having maintained a high weighting to shares right through to now. They need to somehow forget about what total their super accounts reached, and make a decision right now!
January 28th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Yep,
I was looking at it from the perspective of security and maintaining buying power, which gold will hold really well in inflation but it won’t loose too much in deflation either, in real terms that is.
I don’t really know what the price of gold will do, but from the figures I see from the amount of paper (and electronic) dollars out there, adjusting to the gold standard price of $35 an ounce that gold should be more like $5000 US. I know that allot of those dollars are being wiped out but there is still a big disparity in the prices.
The only other thing I was going to mention is that they also supply silver whose price is even more depressed than gold, while I agree it is unlikely that retailers will start accepting gold coins I think silver could have a place as a currency, this is pretty much a worst case scenario endgame though where we are transgressed back to the feudal age.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:58 am
I have some opinions on the deflation / inflation
What many in the deflation camp don’t seem to get is that the second bubble, in housing, deflated the first in stocks, through general inflation in the money supply, by spreading dollars all over the world. 1929 is like year 2000. The housing bubble is like the UK 1932-1937 housing boom on a global scale. Intervention by China and Japan also pushed down US longer term interest rates, and helped have the US money supply higher than normal, just like they also did during the dotcom. Gold can also work well if there is a lot of money printing and not much price increases. The way to think of gold is that kind of environment that we are in now is that gold prevents you from getting robbed from the price decreases you should have had in the case massive printing is done do avoid deflation, that’s why gold can go up very much even much more than the CPI. In the 1971, the US avoided a deflationary depression by going off the gold standard. From golds view it was a deflationary period. That’s how golds supposed to work if governments try to print their way out of depression, even if there is that much price increases occurring because of low demand. That’s why gold and industrial commodities performed well in the early seventies when there was a boom, but in the late seventies, gold had more of a solo performance.
Another thing is that inflation tends to track the M3 over longer periods of time. You can have periods of productivity gains, like the 80-90 era, when this connection seems to be broken, and gold useless, but these productivity gains ends, and later, all the M3 printed in that era of productivity gains, goes straight into inflation again, like with oil the connection is around 1:1. The natural price level of oil now is around 90 dollars, before any peak oil effects are taken into account. Gold is currently holding up better than oil because it’s not an industrial commodity. As the era of productivity gains are over for a while, any money growth have a more direct connection to the CPI now, than during the era of the 80-90-s. Another difference is that I think US governments bonds have been in a bear market since 1998, and will be so, for a long long time, as they print, the only outcome is a trend of higher longer term interest rates. In era’s of higher longer term interest rates and inflation, people are much more eager to spread money to emerging economies, and people are more obsessed with growth, and getting return on the money. That further fuels inflation. If we was to head into deflation, that would definitely push emerging economies from an era of 1970-s stagflation, to disinflation. That would cause true decoupling. That argument have to validity, but for it to happen, people have to wait for them to have a chance to get their interest rates down as inflation fades, so that their consumers can respond to lower interest rates. Since the interest rates in these countries comes from such high levels, and there is so much room to grow credit, there is no reason why they cannot have a credit boom like we had in the 80-90s.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
The performance of gold mining and silver mining stocks from 1929-1936 was an increase of around 600 %. There was a decoupling from gold and silver, with the general market from the spring in 1930, when the general market started to decline after a rally. From 1930 bonds, and stocks were all dumped in favor of gold and silver mining stocks. The graph from gold mining stocks from 1929, and how they behave now, are a mirror in the sense that right now it’s identical to around February 1930. So if we was to mirror 1929, something that is unlikely because we are in a totally different environment, then gold mining stocks would just go on gaining from here.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
http://thelongwaveanalyst.ca/downloads/Homestake.doc
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=ABX#chart1:symbol=abx;range=my;indicator=split+volume;charttype=line;crosshair=cross;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined
If history was to repeat barrick gold should increase a lot in price. And since gold is not fixed this time, gold should also increase a lot.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
The point is – it is not the Gold you want – it is what it can buy at a time when it performs best.
In an inflationary nightmare Gold and Silver will mutiply alot more than an asset like a house.
It may buy you many income producing houses if you trade it in at the right time.
Gold should be the basis of all portfolios.
My 2cents worth.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Hi Bullturnedbear,
My Super cash account should be covered by the government guarantee as the investment fund indicates for the cash component “all underlying investments are currently covered by the Government guarantee arrangements applicable to wholesale bank securities and large deposits.”
I advise others to check that their “Super – cash accounts” are covered. If the government does not back up its guarantees on cash deposits then I would imagine that the social unrest would bring down the government.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Hi prudentsaver!
The context for gold mining stocks was different in the 1930s. In Which industry’s profitability grew as the Great Depression progressed?, Wilhelm Röpk was quoted
The gold standard allows gold mining stocks to prosper during the Great Depression. Today, no country is in the gold standard.
January 28th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Hi Stats,
Thanks for the reminder about the guarantee. I don’t trust it and will not rely on it. How can the government cough up over $2T in cash. They can’t. If the guarantee is required they will force marriages between banks and keep the electronic entries alive or they will issue IOUs.
If a run on the banks starts, the government could restrict the amount a depositor could remove (for a time). Were they to do that you will be able to buy anything you want. As long as you have money outside of the electronic system.
If the guarantee is not needed and I am outside the electronic system, I won’t lose that much (forgo a small amount of interest that will be taxed). If the guarantee is needed and I am outside the electronic system, my money will increase in value by 10 times overnight. I like that potential upside with limited downside.
January 29th, 2009 at 12:07 am
It’s not the fixed gold standard price that helped gold mining companies, because the price was not fixed, it fell to 17 dollars in 1932. It was the knowledge that the fractional reserve was failing, the system would collapse, and that money was being printed, just like it was showing signs of last year, and that a gold mining company was safer than a bank in the sense that they had some real reserves. It had nothing do with fixed price for the gold mining companies, or dividend payment from the gold mining companies.
Most don’t acknowledge it but 1932-1949 inflation was higher year on year, than in the seventies in the worst period, with wage and price controls. It’s the same thing that’s likely to happen now, once the economy pick up.
January 29th, 2009 at 3:52 am
In my Local currency the Norwegian currency there have been a huge strengthening compared to the dollar lately, it’s just getting stronger and stronger.
It’s related to a peak in risk aversion (as seen in the 10 year treasury chart), and a likely bottoming in oil prices. Money are likely flowing into the norwegian currency because foreigners are loading up on norwegian stocks, because they think oil have bottomed out.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=USO#chart1:symbol=uso;range=5y;compare=^tnx;indicator=split+volume;charttype=line;crosshair=cross;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined
January 29th, 2009 at 6:06 am
a news release from the AMI with a very interesting video of Congressman Dennis Kucinich
Dear Friends of the American MONETARY Institute,
Monetary reform is advancing rapidly, because it must, in order to resolve our national crisis.
There are two links below that are MUST viewing, and please forward them to your email lists.
On this link http://cspanjunkie.org/?p=1724 Congressman Dennis Kucinich describes the economic and monetary crisis for one hour on the floor of the House of Representatives. You can see what a devoted and great leader he is. View it all. At about 40 minutes in, he discusses Stephen Zarlenga and our monetary reform proposal – a must see!
Here, http://votersthink.org/?p=1073 Dennis in just over one minute describes the reform program in summary.
Please enjoy the second link immediately, and set aside an hour to view the first link.
The internet is allowing a marvelous communication process to take place in our land, in this time of crisis. Please use it fully, forwarding this to your friends and let me know their reactions.
The full text of the American Monetary Act can be viewed at
http://www.monetary.org/amacolorpamphlet.pdf
Warm regards and thanks for your attention,
Stephen Zarlenga
Director,
American Monetary Institute
Regards
Paul