Harry S Dent: Why the Fed will fail

Harry Dent is always entertaining to listen to, but is he right about the link between demographics and inflation?

There is simply no way the Fed can win the battle it’s currently waging against deflation, because there are 76 million Baby Boomers who increasingly want to save, not spend. Old people don’t buy houses! At the top of the housing boom in recent years, we had the typical upper-­‐middle-­‐class family living in a 4,000-­‐square-­‐foot McMansion. About ten years from now, what will they do? They’ll downsize to a 2,000-­‐ square-­‐foot townhouse. What do they need all those bedrooms for? The kids are gone. They don’t visit anymore. Ten years after that, where are they? They’re in 200-­‐square-­‐foot nursing home. Ten years later, where are they? They’re in a 20-­‐square-­‐foot grave plot. That’s the future of real estate. That’s why real estate has not bounced in Japan after 21 years. That’s why it won’t bounce here in the US either. For every young couple that gets married, has babies, and buys a house, there’s an older couple moving into a nursing home or dying.

In my opinion there is a clear link between credit growth and inflation: the faster credit grows, the faster the money supply grows, and the higher the rate of inflation. Demographics are one of the factors that drive credit growth, but they are not the only factor. Interest rates are just as important: when interest rates are low we tend to save less and borrow more. And jobs, as the Fed discovered, are also important: if you haven’t got a job, you can’t borrow from the bank even when interest rates are low.

At present I would guess that jobs are the biggest constraint on credit growth. Later, interest rates will rise when employment recovers — as the Fed attempts to take some of the heat out of the economy. Only then may demographics become the major restriction on credit growth, with older households down-sizing outnumbering younger households up-sizing. But that is by no means definite: solving the jobs crisis alone could take decades!

Harry dent quoted from John Mauldin | A Decade of Volatility: Demographics, Debt, and Deflation (application/pdf Object).

Pro-Growth and Pro-Wall Street is an Oxymoron | Beat the Press

Dean Baker responds to a NYT opinion that “Mr. Clinton is the president who made the sustained case to Democrats that they had to be pro-growth and pro-Wall Street, not just to get elected, but also to build a more modern economy.”

President Clinton’s policies set the country on a course of bubble driven growth. The prosperity of the last four years of his administration was driven by an unsustainable stock bubble. The collapse of the bubble was responsible for the recession of 2001 and the deficits that get the Washington establishment types so excited. It was difficult for the economy to recover from this downturn which led to, at the time, the longest period without job growth since the Great Depression. When the economy finally did recover from this downturn and start to create jobs it was on the back of the housing bubble.

via Pro-Growth and Pro-Wall Street is an Oxymoron | Beat the Press.

China’s overinvestment: the problem of having too much

By Zarathustra:

How is it that an economy grows at 7.6% yoy is squeezing corporate profitability so hard? How is it that an economy growing at 7.6% yoy feel like there is not enough demand for all the goods and services being produced?…..The answer, to our mind, is quite simply that China has been investing in too much productive capacity…… The return on investments might be good before the financial crisis, yet the collapse of external demand after the financial crisis and more recently in the persistent Euro Crisis have cut external demand significantly. Meanwhile, domestic demand is not growing quite enough to pick up the slack created by collapse of external demand. Worse still, it is rather clear that domestic demand has been sustained by none other than investment itself. Thus, it should come as very little surprise that IMF’s estimate put China’s capacity utilisation at just about 60%.

via China’s overinvestment: the problem of having too much.

Hat tip to Macrobusiness.com.au

Simon Johnson: Why Are the Big Banks Suddenly Afraid? – NYTimes.com

The threat of too-big-to-fail banks has not diminished. The combined assets of the 6 largest US banks is bigger now than in 2008. Simon Johnson, Professor of Entrepreneurship at M.I.T. Sloan School of Management, writes:

A growing number of serious-minded politicians are starting to support the point made by Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and a Republican presidential candidate in the recent primaries: global megabanks have become government-sponsored enterprises; their scale does not result from any kind of market process, but is rather the result of a vast state subsidy scheme.

…..Serious people on the right and on the left are reassessing if we really need our largest banks to be so large and so highly leveraged (i.e., with so much debt relative to their equity). The arguments in favor of keeping the global megabanks and allowing them to grow are very weak or nonexistent.

The big banks will vigorously defend any attempt to break them up and they have deep pockets. It would be far more effective and politically achievable to raise reserve requirements, lifting capital ratios and reducing leverage to the point that large and small institutions alike are no longer a threat to the economy. Even if we adopt a two-tier approach, with higher ratios for institutions above a certain size.

We need to remember that a fractional-reserve banking system is not an essential requirement of the capitalist system. All that is needed is an efficient intermediary between investors and borrowers. Equity-funded banks proved effective in funding Germany’s industrialization prior to WW1. Islamic banks today follow similar principles. Over-dependence on deposits is the primary cause of our current instability.

via Simon Johnson: Why Are the Big Banks Suddenly Afraid? – NYTimes.com.

FedEx First-Quarter Earnings View Citing Weak Global Economy – WSJ.com

FedEx Corp. FDX -0.10% on Tuesday said a sharp decline in manufacturing activity would harm its profits this year, a sign of how declining Chinese output is ricocheting across economies around the world.

The world’s largest air-cargo shipper by revenue said earnings in the August-ended quarter came in below its already reduced expectations.

via FedEx First-Quarter Earnings View Citing Weak Global Economy – WSJ.com.

China’s steel mills braced for slowdown – FT.com

Wang Qinghai, chief executive of Shougang, one of China’s biggest state-owned mills, says one reason for slowing steel demand is that China is changing its economic development model. “The investment-led mode of economic development isn’t sustainable, so the government is actively lowering the growth rate . . . in order to create space for economic structural adjustment,” he said at a conference in Beijing on Saturday. That adjustment is a painful process, however, and Mr Wang summarises the outlook for the steel industry as “huge production capacity, a bleak market, and meagre profit”.

via China’s steel mills braced for slowdown – FT.com.

Australia: Housing market weakens

Housing credit growth is at its lowest level in over 30 years: lower than the dip of the early 1980s and the crash of 1987. The current rate of growth is barely sufficient to match already depressed construction rates for new homes*. The decline should see a gradual softening of housing prices, accelerating if there are any further falls in housing credit growth.

RBA Housing Credit Growth

*Housing finance, for both owner-occupied and investor housing, totaled $59.8 billion for the year ended June 2012 according to the RBA, while residential construction — excluding land — was $44.2 billion according to ABS estimates.

The Fed and the impact of QE

Unless the Fed announces a new round of quantitative easing before the November election, I do not see the S&P 500 this year advancing past its 2007 high of 1560.

The market generally overreacts to balance sheet expansion by the Fed, anticipating higher inflation. What it seems to overlook is the deflationary effect of private sector deleveraging which should enable the Fed to maneuver a soft landing.

The real impact of Fed policy is to subsidize debtors and starve creditors — private investors and pension funds — of yield. The net result is that investors are driven to higher yields — accompanied by higher risk — which is likely to cause more pain at the next down-turn.

The only way to compensate creditors would be to lower taxes on interest, but I question how high this would rank in either party’s priorities.

Bernanke Speech Makes Detailed Case for Fed Action – NYTimes.com

The Fed Chairman hinted at further measures to stimulate employment but is still playing his cards close to his chest as to when and how much:

“It is important to achieve further progress, particularly in the labor market,” Mr. Bernanke said. “Taking due account of the uncertainties and limits of its policy tools, the Federal Reserve will provide additional policy accommodation as needed to promote a stronger economic recovery and sustained improvement in labor market conditions in a context of price stability.”

via Bernanke Speech Makes Detailed Case for Fed Action – NYTimes.com.

Sweden: Failure of the welfare state experiment

…..Sweden has a large welfare state and is successful. This is often seen as a proof that a ‘third way’ policy between socialism and capitalism works well, and that other nations can reach the same favourable social outcomes by simply expanding the size of government. If one studies Swedish history and society in-depth however it quickly becomes evident that this simplistic analysis is flawed. The Swedish experience might as well be used to argue for the benefits of free-market oriented policies, and as a warning of the economic and social problems that can arise when government involvement in society becomes too large…….In the long run….. even the well-functioning societies in Scandinavia have been adversely impacted by welfare dependency and high levels of taxation. The ‘third way’ policy has not persisted – it can be viewed as a short-lived and failed experiment. Throughout most of its modern history Sweden has had a favourable business environment. The period characterised by the most extensive welfare state policies, where Sweden deviated strongly from the western norm, around 1970-1995, is an exception. That period was associated with a stagnant economy.

…….The transition towards an extensive welfare state that occurred in Sweden led….. to an economic cost in terms of reduced entrepreneurship, as taxes and regulation hindered the development of private businesses. It also led to a significant crowding out of private employment. Between 1950 and 2005, the Swedish population grew from seven to nine million, but net job creation in the private sector was zero. Jobs in the public sector expanded rapidly until the end of the 1970s. As it became difficult to further expand the already large public sector, job creation simply stopped (Bjuggren and Johansson, 2009).

Nima Sanandaji, The Institute of Economic Affairs, Sweden Paper August 2012.pdf (application/pdf Object).