The Economy

We were in the mall in Dallas this past weekend. It was as crowded as the day after Thanksgiving. Parking lot was full. Could it be that consumer confidence is down the tubes 'for the other guy'. i.e. 'I think the economy is in the toilet, but I'm ok'
 
Several years ago there was a TV story about 'Sharks in the Water'. The jest of the story was that sharks had been seen on the east coast. It showed a condensed two weeks of stories on the national news. Talking heads warning of 'SHARKS IN THE WATER' and going on to tell people of the threat. Only thing is that there were not more sightings than normal. Just more hype.

I've got a friend who flies one of those planes over the beach, the ones that pull the advertising banners. He said that if the tourists could see all the sharks in the water just a short ways outside the swim zone, they'd never go back in. He doesn't usually tell people, because he depends on the tourist economy. My point being, ignorance is bliss. It might be that way with the economy too. Too much attention is detrimental.

Disclaimer: Afaik, nobody has ever been attacked by a shark at the beach in Ocean City MD or it's neighbors.
 
Hmmmm.....I think you guys are right...that maybe too much attention is detrimental----maybe we should ignore economic news the way we would a two-year old having a tantrum in public so that he could just "get over" his tantrum and move on to more civilized behavior......

I made the mistake of going on to the Motley Fool website and found this:

The Biggest Threat to Our Economy

Basically, it said that:

What are we shifting away from? A lot of things, but one of the biggies is a fierce economic cycle that fueled the past decade. It went something like this:

  • We needed ultra-low interest rates after 9/11.
  • Those low rates fed insatiable demand for housing (real estate was especially attractive, because investors' fingers had just been burned by the dot-com bubble, so stocks were taboo).
  • Rising home values led to a surge in consumer spending -- funded by debt, of course.
  • Spending sprees led to massive trade deficits.
  • Massive trade deficits led to massive capital inflows by foreign investors.
  • Massive capital inflows kept interest rates low.
  • Hey, hey ... low interest rates? We're back to square one!
  • Repeat cycle until wealthy.
So:

Things might start to spin in reverse. Events could go something like this:
  • Lower home and stock prices leads to less consumer spending.
  • Less consumer spending leads to smaller trade deficits.
  • Smaller trade deficits lead to less foreign capital inflows.
  • Less foreign capital inflows lead to higher interest rates.
  • Higher interest rates cause property and stock values to plunge.
  • Plunging values leads to less consumer spending.
  • Less consumer spending ... haven't we been here before?
  • Repeat cycle until broke.
That's one of the biggest threats to our economy today: the possibility of being sucked into another self-reinforcing cycle like we were in the past last decade. Only this time, it'll drive us unreasonably poorer, rather than unreasonably richer.


Does anyone agree? Or is this too much doom and gloom?
 
Tango,
I think you have missed the point. Report current economic news, but, leave off the scare tactics that are put there just to sell their product. There is a big difference in a 5/6% unemployment rate and a 26% unemployment rate of the grate depression. There is a big difference between the current loss of stock value and the 89% loss in the great depression. While I am sure there are some, I have seen no reputable economist say we are in threat of a 'great depression'. In fact most say a 10% unemployment rate may be the top.
 
I've got a friend who flies one of those planes over the beach, the ones that pull the advertising banners. He said that if the tourists could see all the sharks in the water just a short ways outside the swim zone, they'd never go back in. He doesn't usually tell people, because he depends on the tourist economy. My point being, ignorance is bliss. It might be that way with the economy too. Too much attention is detrimental.

I think this is an important point. There is a fine line between not enough information and overwhelming people. My mom, 83, grew up during the depression and she was lamenting the constant stream of bad news. She remembers know the depression was a bad time, but they didn't hear about it constantly, sure there was the news on the radio, but that was interspersed with music, and serial dramas.

I suspect that 80-90% of Americans (and more importantly non-financial journalist) have only a dim understanding of basic investing concepts like the relationship between interest rates and bond prices or stock P/E ratios.
Now they are hearing about esoteric financial products like CDS, and CDO, and that there are trillions of dollars of these things out there. We need hundreds of billions of dollars if not trillions of dollars in bailout, while simultaneously watching their 401K plummet. The doom and gloomers are getting a lot of media attention, and the great depression is mentioned in every discussion of the economy.

I have a very good grasp of economic and investment concepts and I am worried, so I can only imagine how scared those people with only a vague understanding feel. The folks that I know especially the young ones who work for the government or in the military, are mostly blissful ignorant about the situation. They don't have investments and have secure jobs. People like boards members have a good sense of history and we are worried but determined. I am concerned that media is going to incite panic for the folks who are mostly but not completely ignorant.

But FDR was right the only thing we have to Fear is Fear itself.
 
/rant on:
I think the media is under reporting the severity of the problems with our economy, not because they want to, but rather they do not yet comprehend how bad it is going to be. I think Bush, Paulson, Bernanke, the congress, and Obama are underestimating the severity as well. I think "early retirement" along with "buy and hold" are no longer viable concepts for the average Joe. Look forward to the era of the $10 BigMac and $5 Coke.
/rant off:
 
...... I suspect that 80-90% of Americans (and more importantly non-financial journalist) have only a dim understanding of basic investing concepts like .....

What 80-90% of Americans can understand quite well is the figure on the bottom line of their quarterly 401k statement - & for many people that shocker is all that's required to make them start snapping their wallets shut.
 
Texarkandy,
I agree with you statement, however, with consumer spending one of the major pillars of the economy, isn't it the wrong thing to do if they want to see their 401k go up?
 
Texarkandy,
I agree with you statement, however, with consumer spending one of the major pillars of the economy, isn't it the wrong thing to do if they want to see their 401k go up?

Yeah, but I think the Tragedy of the Commons comes into play here. "We could recover if everyone else opens their wallets again, but I'm going to keep mine shut."
 
I think "early retirement" along with "buy and hold" are no longer viable concepts for the average Joe. Look forward to the era of the $10 BigMac and $5 Coke.

ER was never a viable concept for the "average" Joe. Buy and hold not being viable, I wonder what you've got to back that up. It was viable even during the great depression. You may have to hold a while, but unless you're forecasting the end of the American Empire, I don't see how things won't recover. If you're 25, a 10 year recovery might seem impossibly long. Personally, I hope it's more like 2 or 5. If you're 55, you've seen this before and wouldn't be saying buy and hold is dead.
 
and wonder how much worse it would have been if they had CNBC and 24-hour cable news.

The other side of the coin is that the recovery will probably be that much better when the news media hypes the fast rise of the market.
 
I think we're giving the media too much credit . . . as for myself, I'm not convinced that media hype plays much of a role in whether the market goes up, down or sideways. I suspect the real movers and shakers in the market are fairly immune to media hype.
 
The other side of the coin is that the recovery will probably be that much better when the news media hypes the fast rise of the market.


Hmmm maybe we need to give the Fed chair the ability to toss into jail anybody who expresses irrational enthusiasm or (negativity for that matter) about the economy. :D

Of course that would lead to PBS/History channel news shows and super cautious politician. But I bet it would dampen the business cycles.
 
But don't things HAVE TO get better now?

The media will portray Pres. Obama as the savior of the country. They will report in a more upbeat way starting in 2009. That change in their approach could have a positive impact on consumers and the economy.

Just my 1.1 cents!O0
 
Geofrey
Don't confuse the Economy with the Market. I believe the media has an effect on both, but it effects the mood of the average consumer more than the educated consumer. Last stats I saw said that only 20% of the US population had college degrees and there is a good percentage of those that have no business education or market education. Members of this forum do not qualify as 'average consumer'.

Another example today on CBS morning show. A very glum forecast of what would happen if the big 3 were 'no more'. The million of ancillary jobs that would be lost right down to the doughnut shop. Truth, sure, but is anyone really talking about them going away or reorganizing? Not a mention of what would happen if they re organized a far less frightening situation.

Houston Chronicle: paraphrase 'if the auto co. don't get their loan they will be gone in three to four months'
 
In any economic climate.... there is money to be made... and money to be lost. What separates winners from loosers? Usually a fairly simple thing called forethought. Things like planning, delayed gratification, education, and many other things flow from that. I am under no illusion that I will not be getting "rich quick". So that means I need to make plans now. How can I gain in a down market? What things can I do now to plan for future occurances. Obviously the market is tremendously down right now. I look at history as my guide... and why is that? Because technology changes.... but by and large people do not. The stock market has since it's beginning shown ups and down in a cyclical fashion. I laugh at all of those who say.... "but this time is different!!!" Most of those people believe that this time or place is unique in history... it might be more severe than normal... but not really any different. That means to me that now is a perfect time to get back into the market. Because I am VERY confident that within the next 20+ years my returns will not just be average.... but GREAT because of it. And I say to all of the naysayers a very wise thing a forum member said to me a while back... (sorry I do not remember who it was). If someone like myself who is prudent... living well within my means, plans for the future, saves in a 401k and a ROTH IRA, etc, and does this for the next 20+ years cannot succeed... then the rest of the world is complely doomed anyway. And in that case money will be the least of my concerns, and food and ammo will top the list. And you know what... even in that eventuality (as far fetched as it is), I will still probably succeed... because I will still employ the same ideas of forethought and planning that I do today, and those traits help you in almost any situation.
 
Over the past few weeks, I've died a thousand deaths, each one being a trip to my own personal hell and back. My portfolio is now about half as light, but the good news is that I'm finally diversified and down to about 50% equities and commodities which is where I should have been in the first damn place!

Anyhow, I've been staring for a few days at Professor Schiller's (Yale economist) historical stock market database. After plotting the SP500 since the 19th century, there's one constant, and that is regression to the mean trend line. The good news is that we are now more or less regressed to the mean after a nearly 50% loss from its peak last year. The bad news is that we were so greatly over the mean, that this crash only gets us to the mean, not below it. In other words, we're only about fairly valued now. This is also validated by Prof. Schiller's favorite valuation indicator, PE10, which is the PE of the SP500 with the "E" being the average earnings over the past decade. We are actually now finally a little below the PE10 long-term trend line. The last time this happened was nearly two decades ago!

Now being fairly valued after a long period of over-valuation may strike some as good news but hold your enthusiasm. The problem is that we humans never do things in moderation. Looking at the chart and its data, just about every time there's been an abrupt regression to the fair value from way above average levels, investors always oversell causing a major sustained undershoot below the trend line. If I look at the 90th percentile of the negative deviations, it would take approximately another over 50% decline for us to get there. To get to the historically worst case negative deviation from the mean, it would take a whopping 70% decline from today's price. This recent market drop is clearly different from the post 9/11 crash and the Asian crisis of the last decade. Those got us nowhere near back to the mean like this one has. They were not regressions to the mean.

This one is different.

Sorry, but that's what the data say. And that's not all of it. Unfortunately, most of these undershoots take anywhere from a minimum of a little under a decade to over two decades to regress back up to the mean. I've never been a market timer, but I have no qualms now about adjusting my portfolio mix in a more dynamic fashion according to longer-term market trends. By "adjusting", I do mean more than just the classical rebalancing routine, but I don't mean day-trading or all-in/all-out market switching strategies which are all fool's errands IMHO.

I know I've been accused of suddenly showing up here and being a chicken little, but I hope you all are open-minded enough to listen. I have some "street cred" in that I've been FIREd since my early 40's, and have always religiously subscribed to the "buy-hold-rebalance" philosophy and the 3-4% HSWR approach. At this point however, I know that I cannot/will not wait for 1-3 decades just to get back to the average trend line. If history is a teacher, that may very well be what we're facing here. Even if we get a short-lived rally into next year as all that "bailout" cash gets moved from coffer to coffer, we are facing a perfect storm with the after-effects of this crisis, and the age demographics crisis which is starting in earnest in '09 and '10. We boomers are quickly moving past our peak consumption phase, and with two thirds of the economy relying on the consumer, well you can guess what will happen.

If there's any silver lining here at all, if this scenario plays itself out - and of course, I would love nothing more than to be dead wrong - those with the cash will have the buying opportunities of a lifetime in equities, real estate, etc. Also, those of us with teenagers, or young adult children, will also be glad to see them enjoy reasonable property prices and costs of living again, after a major deflationary cycle, assuming of course they can get and keep jobs.
 
Not jumping off a bridge!

If you can't/won't wait, what are your plans?

I realized that may have come off like I'm ending it all, unable to wait anymore, but that's not what I meant.:)

I have no pretense of being able to call any sort of a bottom or top, so barring that type of omniscience, I intend to closely monitor market trends (e.g. 1-4 mo. moving averages), peaks and valleys, all relative to the mean trend line, and systematically trim my exposure on the way down, while increasing it on the way up. Again, this is NOT market timing. Instead, I'm letting the trend dictate what I do. I back-tested this somewhat using the Schiller data and it seems to work reasonably well at preserving principal during sustained downward periods, and increasing equity exposure during sustained upswings. In no way, shape or form does this get you all-in or all-out at absolute tops and bottoms, nor is it any good at all for daily/weekly volatility trading. It only works for detecting secular trends and reacting with relatively small adjustments at a time.

Had this been in place last year, for example, I would have started reducing equity exposures right at the start of this year, while the SP500 was still above 1,300, after detecting the sustained downward trend signal that started late last year. This would have continued throughout the year, and by now, I would probably be under 50% equities, but having sold at an average much (and I mean much) higher than what I actually "panic" (I didn't really panic but it was a tough period) sold at without this system.

Think of it as a graded, progressive/regressive, stop-loss, cost-averaging strategy (long-winded name I know). I'm not talking major single all-in/out style moves, but more like retargeting a few % points each trigger. However, in a period during which a trend is sustained, the small steps can accumulate and result in major changes to equity exposure over the period. The magnitude of the step-ups, or step-downs, are related to the distance from the trend line, because history shows that risks correlate to how far the market deviates from the mean.

This is what I meant by "cannot/ will not wait". I meant having a system and acting in a disciplined fashion, to mitigate, but certainly not eliminate, my risks. I aim to preserve what I have left after this year's destruction with the utmost of tender loving care. "Shoulda, woulda, coulda" will become "must, can, will". If there is a bailout-induced rally, this will allow me to enjoy a good part of it, before what I fear may be a truly sustained secular downslide.

The past year was very humbling for me, but the good thing that came out of it is that it focussed my mind like never before. Like I said, I dropped everything and spent days/weeks staring and playing with data, and I've really learned my lesson. To my mind, it's foolish to be married to an investing and SWR paradigm when the whole world has obviously changed. Again, 10, 20, 30 years of watching my hard-earned nest egg decay just won't work for this retiree. If you're young or this works for you, then you shouldn't even be reading this.

I do hope I'm wrong, but objectively speaking, this one sure seems to be "different" from all the run-of-the-mill recessions I've experienced in my lifetime. Yes, they all felt apocalyptically bad at the time, but this one... this one... feels, smells and looks like the mother of all those.

Sorry about the long-winded posts. Tough days for me. Thanks for reading if you still are.
 
Anyhow, I've been staring for a few days at Professor Schiller's (Yale economist) historical stock market database. After plotting the SP500 since the 19th century, there's one constant, and that is regression to the mean trend line. The good news is that we are now more or less regressed to the mean after a nearly 50% loss from its peak last year. The bad news is that we were so greatly over the mean, that this crash only gets us to the mean, not below it. In other words, we're only about fairly valued now. This is also validated by Prof. Schiller's favorite valuation indicator, PE10, which is the PE of the SP500 with the "E" being the average earnings over the past decade. We are actually now finally a little below the PE10 long-term trend line. The last time this happened was nearly two decades ago!

Now being fairly valued after a long period of over-valuation may strike some as good news but hold your enthusiasm. The problem is that we humans never do things in moderation. Looking at the chart and its data, just about every time there's been an abrupt regression to the fair value from way above average levels, investors always oversell causing a major sustained undershoot below the trend line. If I look at the 90th percentile of the negative deviations, it would take approximately another over 50% decline for us to get there. To get to the historically worst case negative deviation from the mean, it would take a whopping 70% decline from today's price. This recent market drop is clearly different from the post 9/11 crash and the Asian crisis of the last decade. Those got us nowhere near back to the mean like this one has. They were not regressions to the mean.

This one is different.

Sorry, but that's what the data say. And that's not all of it. Unfortunately, most of these undershoots take anywhere from a minimum of a little under a decade to over two decades to regress back up to the mean. I've never been a market timer, but I have no qualms now about adjusting my portfolio mix in a more dynamic fashion according to longer-term market trends. By "adjusting", I do mean more than just the classical rebalancing routine, but I don't mean day-trading or all-in/all-out market switching strategies which are all fool's errands IMHO.

I know I've been accused of suddenly showing up here and being a chicken little, but I hope you all are open-minded enough to listen. I have some "street cred" in that I've been FIREd since my early 40's, and have always religiously subscribed to the "buy-hold-rebalance" philosophy and the 3-4% HSWR approach. At this point however, I know that I cannot/will not wait for 1-3 decades just to get back to the average trend line. If history is a teacher, that may very well be what we're facing here. Even if we get a short-lived rally into next year as all that "bailout" cash gets moved from coffer to coffer, we are facing a perfect storm with the after-effects of this crisis, and the age demographics crisis which is starting in earnest in '09 and '10. We boomers are quickly moving past our peak consumption phase, and with two thirds of the economy relying on the consumer, well you can guess what will happen.

If there's any silver lining here at all, if this scenario plays itself out - and of course, I would love nothing more than to be dead wrong - those with the cash will have the buying opportunities of a lifetime in equities, real estate, etc. Also, those of us with teenagers, or young adult children, will also be glad to see them enjoy reasonable property prices and costs of living again, after a major deflationary cycle, assuming of course they can get and keep jobs.

Big Galloot, scary stuff that you are posting! I copied some of it and asked my stock broker/"financial advisor" what he thought. here is his reply:

The trend line he refers to in his comments needs further investigation. Trends in the country have changed dramatically in recent decades. There has been a lot more growth in this country than that of the early 1900s. I wonder if the trend line is skewed to the downside by using the slow growth period of time in our country and mixing it with the relative short term, high growth numbers of recent decades.
In any respect, I have a hard time believing it is going to get that bad. I suspect we will have some more testing of the downside, but nothing of that size. I could be wrong, but the economic numbers, albeit bad, are not giving us signals that the 2nd Great Depression is upon us. If we have a correction from here of another 70%, then you can expect food lines.
I tend to take a more moderate view of what is going to take place next. Volatility has calmed down quite a bit. We had record amounts of cash in this country prior to this correction. Buyers are seeming to show up at 8000. Valuations get to exagerated low levels and bargain hunting seemingly begun. Large amounts of capital is being infused all around the world. Money is cheap and getting cheaper. Technology, Energy, Innovations and many other industries can spark better growth going forward and they will have the money and support to move forward.
There is no doubt there will be some employment issues in this country moving forward. The amplified discussions coming from the UAW on the recent bailout request make everyone believe that if they do not get the bailout that 4-5Million jobs will be lost simultaneously. That is not fact. Bankruptcy protection is not a point where you turn off the lights and send everyone home. The UAW uses these fear tactics to get the money so they can keep their contracts.
One last point, how much does the rest of the world need the United States to succeed?
If there is a correction of that magnitude, what would happen to the rest of the world?
Do these types of discussions seem doomsday like?
When something is too good to be true, it usually is.
When something is too bad to be true, it usually is.
--------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure he really addressed the exact topic. But can anyone give any input as to whether they disagree/agree with him?
 
When something is too good to be true, it usually is.
When something is too bad to be true, it usually is.
Yep. Things are rarely as good as we hope or as bad as we fear.

I hope BG gets a commission on each gallon of black paint he sells...;)
 
Last edited:
I do hope I'm wrong, but objectively speaking, this one sure seems to be "different" from all the run-of-the-mill recessions I've experienced in my lifetime. Yes, they all felt apocalyptically bad at the time, but this one... this one... feels, smells and looks like the mother of all those.

Sorry about the long-winded posts. Tough days for me. Thanks for reading if you still are.
They are all different. And I read the Shiller data just as you do. But there are many ways to approach valuation, and by some of these ways values look perhaps not rock bottom, but nevertheless pretty good. Why should they be rock bottom with risk-free interest rates evidently headed to 0?

I see your showing up here with a well reasoned but one-sided read on valuation as just another sign of the bottoming process. There are always many ways to see anything; and the way that one chooses often means more than the argument advanced.

The other thing is that it is a market of stocks, not a stock market. Some things may still be quite overpriced. But many are priced such that we will be kicking ourselves for a long time if we do not act.

Ha
 
The other thing is that it is a market of stocks, not a stock market. Some things may still be quite overpriced. But many are priced such that we will be kicking ourselves for a long time if we do not act.

Ha

Indeed, I agree. Can you tell us which are which?:D
 
In searching for articles online to help me stay in the market and not capitulate, I found this article by Peter Lynch:

Perspective: Stock Market has worst week in History – where do we go from here? | Solar Feeds

Of course it's over a month old, but still a little reassuring, especially coming from Mr. Lynch (who made a lot of money for me back in the day, with Magellan). Seems like people were saying the same gloom and doom things even twenty and thirty years ago. So this guy knows what he's talking about (even though I don't think he is active in the investment world anymore), right? Right?
 
Well I have been early retired for 2 1/2 weeks now, here is my simplistic view.
I remember while in Korea 1971 over 400 yen to the dollar,now about 98.
Tomato soup 10 about Cents a can, gas .31/gal 1972.
When first married in 1974 both cars were paid for, both of us made about 10K a year,was able to save about 10K year. Bought first house in 1976 40K brand new.
1979 3 kids later, sold house, bought another new one for 69K making about 15K
a year wife not working at the time. I am still in this house. Yes wife survived 3 kids
that fast.
My take.
Housing prices are now way too high, even with two average salaries it is difficult for a young married couple to afford to buy a house. This coupled with infaltion of realestate taxes,energy,food,insurance cars and anything else you car to add in,seems to me has outpaced wages, even for two people.
As for the economy in general I can watch my sons landscaping business slow
down this year, gone are the 30K-40K patios he was installing. I have told him
to hoard cash, I dread trying to pay his mortgage with my retirement savings next
year.
My wife is in realestate, sells new construction and of course re-sales.
Just two years back she was making 100K, now for the past year ZERO.
Bottom line, what did this.
We have lost our manufactuing base, we manufacture practically nothing.
70% of economy is service, money just going around in circles.
Too many bean counters running corporate america.
By the way the bean counters are what got me early retired, our old line
1865 company was bought out by an investiment group. I wish them good
luck with the Global Matrix.
Early retired chemist.
Old Mike
PS: Happy to be retired.
 
Back
Top Bottom