Tag Archives: 2008 crisis

They Said That? 3/25/15

From theburningplatform.com, “Trust Wall Street & Their MSM Lackeys This Time,”:

The stock market topped out in January 2000 and proceeded to fall 40% over the next 32 months. Here is what the “experts” had to say at the time. You could fast forward to 2007 and the same idiots were saying the same things, before the market proceeded to drop 50%. Turn on CNBC today and many of these same shills are mouthing the same gibberish. At least they are consistent assholes.

March 1999: Harry S. Dent, author of “The Roaring 2000s.” “There has been a paradigm shift.” Poor Harry, the New Economy arrived, so did a long recession.

August 1999: Charles Kadlec, author, “Dow 100,000.” “The DJIA will reach 100,000 in 2020 after “two decades of above-average economic growth with price stability.”

October 1999: James Glassman, author, “Dow 36,000.” “What is dangerous is for Americans not to be in the market. We’re going to reach a point where stocks are correctly priced … it’s not a bubble … The stock market is undervalued.”

December 1999: Joseph Battipaglia, market analyst. “Some fear a burst Internet bubble, but our analysis shows that Internet companies … carry expected long-term growth rates twice other rapidly growing segments within tech.”

December 1999: Larry Wachtel, Prudential. “Most of these stocks are reasonably priced. There’s no reason for them to correct violently in the year 2000.” Nasdaq lost over 50%.

December 1999: Ralph Acampora, Prudential Securities. “I’m not saying this is a straight line up. … I’m saying any kind of declines, buy them!”

February 2000: Larry Kudlow, CNBC host. “This correction will run its course until the middle of the year. Then things will pick up again, because not even Greenspan can stop the Internet economy.”

April 2000: Myron Kandel, CNN. “The bottom line is in, before the end of the year, the Nasdaq and Dow will be at new record highs.”

September 2000: Jim Cramer, host of “Mad Money” on CNBC. Sun Microsystems “has the best near-term outlook of any company I know.” It dropped from $60 to below $3 in two years.
November 2000: Louis Rukeyser on CNN. “Over the next year or two the market will be higher, and I know over the next five to ten years it will be higher.” Markets kept losing for a few yearsl

December 2000: Jeffrey Applegate, Lehman strategist. “The bulk of the correction is behind us, so now is the time to be offensive, not defensive.” Another sucker’s rally.

December 2000: Alan Greenspan. “The three- to five-year earnings projections of more than a thousand analysts … have generally held firm. Such expectations, should they persist, bode well for continued capital deepening and sustained growth.”

January 2001: Suze Orman, financial guru. “The QQQ, they’re a buy. They may go down, but if you dollar-cost average, where you put money every single month into them, I think, in the long run, it’s the way to play the Nasdaq.” The QQQ fell 60% further.

March 2001: Maria Bartiromo, CNBC anchor. “The individual out there is actually not throwing money at things that they do not understand, and is actually using the news and using the information out there to make smart decisions.”

April 2001: Abby Joseph Cohen, Goldman Sachs. “The time to be nervous was a year ago. The S&P was overvalued, it’s now undervalued.” Markets crashed for 18 more months.

August 2001: Lou Dobbs, CNN anchor. “Let me make it very clear. I’m a bull, on the market, on the economy. And let me repeat, I am a bull.” And down it went.

June 2002: Larry Kudlow, CNBC host. “The shock therapy of a decisive war will elevate the stock market by a couple thousand points.” He also predicted the Dow would hit 35,000 by 2010.

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2015/03/24/trust-wall-street-this-time-their-msm-lackeys/

A similarly unimpressive string of  quotes from various financial luminaries in 20006-2007 could be compiled. The two amazing thing about both periods, and the ensuing financial crises, was that whatever the models these so-called experts were using, they missed gigantic, epochal upheaval (SLL got them both right), and these so-called experts still get a respectful mass audience in the MSM. Meanwhile, the people who got it right in either crisis have, for the most part, disappeared into very wealthy obscurity.

The Song Remains the Same, from The Economic Cycle Research Institute

From the Economic Cycle Research Institute, at http://www.businesscycle.com:

Eleven trillion dollars: that’s how much of so-called Quantitative Easing the world’s central banks have done since the 2008 crisis. To put that in perspective, with eleven trillion dollars you could pay off pretty much all U.S. household debt – all mortgages, all car and student loans, credit cards – you name it.

So what did the global economy get for $11,000,000,000,000 in QE?

Following a post-recession pop, we got collapsing world trade growth, and that’s even with prices falling over the past three to four years.

Why is this happening?

It’s not because this time around things are different. To the contrary, the song remains the same.

For a long time, nearly four decades, growth has been getting progressively weaker during each recovery from recession. Of course, the U.S. is a major contributor to world trade and QE, but its trend of weaker growth is present in all major developed economies.

There are two key drivers behind this declining trend: demographics and lower productivity growth. Yes, it’s true that we’ve seen pretty good U.S. jobs growth recently, but that comes with productivity growth slamming down to zero.

Japan, with its “lost decades,” is at the leading edge of this long-term trend. But make no mistake, Europe, and as we see, even the U.S., are not far behind. Knowing this, will a trillion or so of more QE from the ECB make the trends in these charts turn and go the other way?

https://www.businesscycle.com/ecri-news-events/news-details/economic-cycle-research-ecri-the-song-remains-the-same-1

10 Charts Which Show We Are Much Worse Off Than Just Before The Last Economic Crisis, by Michael Snyder

An appropriate adjective for the much-ballyhooed and greatly underforming economic recovery since 2009 would be “artificial.” Micheal Snyder, at theeconomiccollapseblog.com, presents graphical evidence of just how artificial it’s been, and how many important indicators are in worse shape than they were before the financial crisis:

If you believe that ignorance is bliss, you might not want to read this article. I am going to dispel the notion that there has been any sort of “economic recovery”, and I am going to show that we are much worse off than we were just prior to the last economic crisis. If you go back to 2007, people were feeling really good about things. Houses were being flipped like crazy, the stock market was booming and unemployment was relatively low. But then the financial crisis of 2008 struck, and for a while it felt like the world was coming to an end. Of course it didn’t come to an end – it was just the first wave of our problems. The waves that come next are going to be the ones that really wipe us out. Unfortunately, because we have experienced a few years of relative stability, many Americans have become convinced that Barack Obama, Janet Yellen and the rest of the folks in Washington D.C. have fixed whatever problems caused the last crisis. Even though all of the numbers are screaming otherwise, there are millions upon millions of people out there that truly believe that everything is going to be okay somehow. We never seem to learn from the past, and when this next economic downturn strikes it is going to do an astonishing amount of damage because we are already in a significantly weakened state from the last one.

For each of the charts that I am about to share with you, I want you to focus on the last shaded gray bar on each chart which represents the last recession. As you will see, our economic problems are significantly worse than they were just before the financial crisis of 2008. That means that we are far less equipped to handle a major economic crisis than we were the last time.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/10-charts-which-show-we-are-much-worse-off-than-just-before-the-last-economic-crisis

To continue reading, and for the 10 charts: 10 Charts

Go to an ATM and the Last Thing You’ll Get Is Cash, by Bill Bonner

Something to think about, and to make contingency plans for (i.e., keep a substantial amount of cash in a safe and accessible place), from Bill Bonner, on theburningplatform.com:

Back in the Day …
The stock market paused to draw breath on Wednesday. The Dow ended up more or less where it started. Not a bad day. Not a good day either. There was no bounce after Tuesday’s dizzying slide.

September 15, 2008, was a really bad day on Wall Street. Lehman Brothers sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The Dow plummeted more than 500 points.

Putnam Investments shut a $12.3 billion money-market fund. Mizuho Trust & Banking cut its profit forecast in half. And the New York Stock Exchange halted trading in Constellation Energy, after its stock dropped 57%.

But this was just the start, not the end …

The Day the Cash Disappeared
The following Thursday, the Federal Reserve noticed an odd and alarming trend: Cash was disappearing. Outflows from money market accounts topped $550 billion in less than two hours.

If that had continued, Representative Paul Kanjorski of the 11th congressional district of Pennsylvania recalled:

“The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped $105 billion into the system. And it quickly realized it could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close down the operation… to close down the money accounts. […]

If they had not done so, in their estimation, by 2 p.m. that day $5.5 trillion would have been withdrawn. That would have collapsed the US economy. Within 24 hours, the world economy would have collapsed.

We talked at that time about what would have happened. It would have been the end of our economic and political system as we know it. People who say we would have gone back to the 16th century were being optimistic.”

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2015/03/15/go-to-an-atm-and-the-last-thing-youll-get-is-cash/

To continue reading: The Last Thing You’ll Get Is Cash

He Said That? 3/13/15

Robert Prechter is recognized by technical financial analysts as one of the greats. He’s usually right, but usually early. Here are a few quotes from Mr. Prechter in his latest Elliot Wave Theorist:

The risk in the stock market is epic.

The persistence of extreme net optimism among financial advisors—shown graphically in the January issue—is a crushing weight on the stock market’s shoulders that warns of a deep, long bear market. The only time optimism probably lasted longer was over the peaking process of the Roman Empire.

When companies buy back their own stock at a fevered pace, it’s a mania. When they accelerate their buying to double a previously gargantuan amount, and borrow to do it, it’s the top of a mania….Heavy buybacks also indicate that companies lack worthy economic investments, which is a terrible situation. Yet worse, stock buybacks seem to be just another way for investors to loot a company.

Consider the looming consequences of all these buybacks: If the profits of these companies are being generated by a rising stock market, which is rising due to their own stock buying, what will happen to corporate profits when the market turns down? It will turn their big paper profits into even bigger losses….Volume has been both light and declining since early 2009, a period of six years….Light-volume rallies are usually bear market rallies.

Last month’s issue made an extended case for a final high in the price of the benchmark 30-year U.S. Treasury bond. Since the last trading of January, 30-year T-bonds have fallen 10%.

It is impossible to overstate the risk in the bond market.

If the current interest rate cycles plays out much as it did back then [1929-1932], we face the immediate prospect of a stock market collapse, debt defaults and soaring interest rates, even on Treasuries.

As interest rates rise over coming years, the Fed, which holds $4.5 trillion worth of long term government bonds and mortgages, is not going to know what hit it.

The Fed is not alone. Bond investors of all kinds are set up to lose a fortune.

Despite mounting evidence of deflationary forces, economists, for the most part, haven’t budged on their stance.

Potential deflation is severe because the credit situation is insane.

Central banks love to talk about the people their programs supposedly help. But values aren’t free. Some people are always stuck on the paying side, even if you can’t see them. European pensions are not the only ones in trouble; they’re faltering in the U.S.

Because pensions invest in debt, stocks, real estate and even commodities, all of which are in or approaching bear markets, they are doomed to implode.

Large gobs of non-self-liquidating (consumer) debt are poisoning the financial system. Yet all governments and central banks have to offer to counteract the deadly effect is…more poison.

Prechter has made some way-to-early or outright wrong calls, but among the ones he got right: the 1980s bull market in stocks and the bear market in precious metals right; the tech wreck of the early 2000s; the bull market in gold and silver that started around the same time; the housing bust and financial crisis of 2006-2009; the 2009 bottom of that crisis; the top of the gold and silver markets in 2011; and the commodity—including oil—deflation and big rally in the dollar that began last year. Generally his calls are met with skepticism or outright derision, and his longstanding warning of an impending  financial disaster of epic proportions have been treated in many quarters as the rant of a deranged madman. SLL says ignore these quotes at your financial peril. See also “Crisis Progress Report (5)-The Black Hole,” SLL, 3/ /15.

A Mania of Manias, by Robert Gore

On December 5, 1996, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board Alan Greenspan asked: “But how do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset values, which then become subject to unexpected and prolonged contractions as they have in Japan over the past decade?” Greenspan was worried about the stock market, particularly the booming tech sector, but for the next three years they just got more exuberant and more irrational.

The subsequent crash took 38 percent off the DJIA and 77 percent off the tech-heavy NASDAQ in a couple of years. Speculators who were short the tech stocks and indexes made buy-an-island profits, but most of them had already been carried out on stretchers. The NASDAQ had gone from 1492.4 in 1998 to 5048.62 at its 2000 high, a gain of 238 percent. Up to the crash, speculators justifiably said, “This is insanity,” bet accordingly, and lost their shirts. The NASDAQ bottomed in 2002 at 1139.9, below where it had begun its final lift-off in 1998. Greenspan had been derided for his “irrational exuberance” speech for three years, but by 2002 he was hailed as a seer.

Greenspan’s speech incorporated no extraordinary analytical insight, merely recognition that in a finite world, off-the-chart returns can’t last forever, or as the old traders’ adage puts it: trees don’t grow to the sky. The paradox of Greenspan is that he made such a public utterance about a financial condition that he bore responsibility for perpetuating. He has never acknowledged what became known as the “Greenspan put,” first instituted in response to the stock market crash of 1987. Every significant financial perturbation was met with more and cheaper money, and the Greenspan Fed even launched a preemptive strike against a threat that never materialized. (Anybody remember the Y2K disaster?) That pre-millennium largess sparked the equity indexes’ final spasmodic rapture before the tech wreck.

Greenspan’s flood of money after that wreck launched the great housing bubble, and again those who muttered, “This is insanity,” and bet accordingly lost their shirts—until they didn’t. The tech bubble had been fed by dreams of technologies most of the dreamers didn’t understand, a belief in magic and a “new economy”. There’s nothing magic about a house. It’s a wasting asset, and for most of U.S. history it has been regarded as a place to live, not as an ATM, investment, or retirement nest egg. And certainly not as a speculative asset, bought on leverage, held for a short time, and flipped for a profit.

So there was not even a belief in technological magic to “excuse” the housing bubble, just a lot of people on TV, in academia, on Wall Street, and in the government, proclaiming that house prices never go down (they did in the Great Depression), so buy one, or several, or many, before prices went up next month. But for the easy, cheap money spewed by the Greenspan and Bernanke Feds, the housing bubble would never have happened. When it burst the DJIA lost 54 percent from its 2007 peak to its 2009 low. Many of the derivatives created on the financial back end were worthless. Some of the shorts found themselves on the Forbes 400, but not before they had suffered substantial losses. It’s tough to time a bursting bubble.

Which brings us to the present day. If the tech mania was based on magic, and the housing mania was based on a supposed fact that was historically untrue, today’s mania is a mania of manias, interlinked and resting on premises that are patently illogical, contradicted by both the historical record and current experience. Those premises are: central planning works, government debt promotes prosperity, and economic growth stems from central banks buying that debt with money they create from thin air. On these premises rest manias in governments, their debts, and central banking.

If central planning worked, there would still be a USSR and China would not have tossed Mao’s brand of communism into the dustbin of history. These historical bastions of non-prosperity had to resort to “demand management.” When their economies were unable to provide the basic necessities of life, their enlightened rulers slaughtered millions. The US imported central planning with the Great Depression, but it worked no better here than it had for Stalin. Since then, government failures have been legion while the Information Revolution has transformed the economy, but the belief in central planning—and hostility towards markets and the profit motive—is unshakeable. Millions supported Obamacare, a big step towards centrally planned and provided medicine, probably after reading about it on their iphones.

The term “developed country” now refers to those countries whose governments have developed mountains of debt and future commitments they have no hope of repaying. The valleys are demographic; most of those nations have birth rates that aren’t replacing the current aging populations, and fall far short of providing a sufficient workforce to fund the old folks’ benefits. Japan has the dubious honor of having one of the highest mountains—its government’s debt is over 240 percent of its GDP, and one of the deepest valleys. Its birthrate is among the world’s lowest, and it stringently restricts immigration.

Most government debt doesn’t go towards projects that will produce an economic return; it funds consumption. The belief (hope?) persists that such consumption somehow leads to economic growth, although a weak “recovery” in the face of the greatest global governmental debt binge in history offers no support. Germany, which has incurred relatively little debt since the financial crisis, has had one of the world’s best-performing economies, while Japan, which has buried itself in IOUs, just reentered recession.

The debt binge hasn’t worked out as planned, but the quack economic central planners have more snake oil: central bank monetization of that debt to suppress interest rates. The Japanese central bank has monetized its government’s debt at low rates for years. It is currently buying 100 percent of the government’s issuance, and the yield on its ten-year bond dropped to .31 percent, but Japan has endured serial recessions. If central bank balance sheet expansion and low interest rates were the road to riches, why not monetize everything and create universal wealth? The absurdity of that proposition is self-evident, but equity markets the world over rally every time a central banker hints of more balance sheet expansion and continuing microscopic interest rates (see “Ms. Yellen Whispers Sweet Nothings in Mr. Market’s Ear,” SLL, 12/19/14)

Tulips, the South Sea Bubble, the new economy, the housing bubble—at some point the greatest fool has bought into an absurdity and a market that could only go one way goes the other way, precipitously. If the tech wreck was a jump off a thirty-meter platform and the 2008 financial crisis a plunge off the cliffs of Acapulco, the end of this multiple-absurdity mania of manias will be a swan dive from the top of the Empire State Building into a two-foot wading pool.

Seismic economic and financial upheaval will shake political foundations around the world. What will governments and central banks do? They are already buried in debt, and interest rates are at zero or below. Yet their constituents have bought into the absurdities of their supposed omniscience and omnipotence. They will, like spoiled children, demand immediate solutions to decades-in-the-making problems caused by central planning, and its attendant debt promotion and central bank machinations.

Of course, the same prediction could have been made at the end of 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, and 2009 (and SLL made it at the end of some of those years), and it may be a just a prediction, not a reality, at the end of 2015. A good mechanic can listen to an engine’s rattle and correctly predict the car will break down, but not necessarily say whether it will be 50 or 500 miles down the road. Who knows when the jerry-rigged contraption known as the global economy will fall apart? It’s belching blue smoke. The oil market serves as a reminder that not all assets can be monetized and not all prices “administered” by the central planners. It may also be the dashboard red light that goes on just before the engine gives its death rattle and the car stops (see “Oil Ushers in the Depression,” SLL, 12/1/14, and “Oil Economics, Part 2,” SLL, 12/3/14).. This time, however, there will be no deficit-financing or central-bank-monetization AAA tow truck a cellphone call away to come rescue it.

THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE GOVERNMENT WAS SMALL, THE NATIONAL DEBT A ROUNDING ERRROR, AND  THERE WAS NO CENTRAL BANK. HOW DID WE SURVIVE? READ ROBERT GORE’S EPIC NOVEL OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND FIND OUT!

Unknown

AMAZON

KINDLE

NOOK

A Skyscraper of Cards by Robert Gore

Every now and then the world is visited by one of these delusive seasons, when “the credit system,” as it is called, expands to full luxuriance, everybody trusts everybody; a bad debt is a thing unheard of; the broad way to certain and sudden wealth lies plain and open; and men are tempted to dash forward boldly, from the facility of borrowing….Every one now talks in thousands; nothing is heard but gigantic operations in trade; great purchases and sales of real property, and immense sums made at every transfer….Speculation is the romance of trade, and casts contempt upon all its sober realities….a panic succeeds, and the whole superstructure, built upon credit and reared by speculation, crumbles to the ground, leaving scarce a wreck behind: ‘It is such stuff as dreams are made of.’

Washington Irving, The Great Mississippi Bubble, 1820

Had the Nobel Prize for economics existed back in 1820, Mr. Irving would have been a worthy candidate. He certainly had a better grasp of the subject than many who have won it. As Deacon Bainbridge, a character in The Golden Pinnacle, noted: “Historically, you’ve been able to tell everything you need to know about a government by the quality of its money.” Money has become the “stuff as dreams are made of”: ephemeral, evanescent, lighter than air…vanishing when eyes are opened. As chaos engulfs the world, governments stand revealed; they’re of the same quality as their currencies.

Money reduces the transaction costs and inefficiencies associated with barter and is a store of value, the standard of accounting, and the medium of exchange. Debt allows those who produce more than they consume to lend and earn a return from those who use that surplus to consume or invest. A system whereby money and debt are created at the whim of either a government or its central bank will not work, in that long run Keynes infamously dismissed, because it cannot work. When money and credit are divorced from the underlying economy, they become agents of destruction rather than production and growth.

The mathematics of debt growth in excess of underlying economic growth are inescapable. Taken to its logical extreme, every asset would be collateralized and debt service would stifle economic activity. Before that point is reached, however, debt becomes an unbearable economic burden—its costs exceed its benefits—which throws debt formation into reverse. The reversal in a system whereby fiat money, governmental borrowing, and central banking have divorced debt growth from the real economy is swift, dramatic, and inevitably contractive and deflationary.

The global government- and central bank-promoted expansion of debt the last five years has been sold as a means of restoring aggregate demand, combatting perceived threats of deflation, raising the prices of financial assets and real estate, and creating economically beneficial wealth effects. It actually marks the end game of many decades in which debt and the price of debt have been completely untethered from the real economy.

A skyscraper of cards has been built on a superabundance of debt priced at interest rates that offer creditors no compensation for credit or market risk, much less a real return on their capital. The purported justifications for the debt explosion are specious. It is actually a last-gasp attempt by governments to reduce their debt service costs and devalue their staggering levels of debt through currency devaluation and inflation. Central banks have been willing accomplices; buyers of government debt whose interest-rate-insensitive demand has driven rates far lower than what would have prevailed if the market were not subject to their manipulation.

Much of the global economy is a mirage. An appreciable percentage of malls, auto dealerships, restaurants, real estate developments, office towers and other hallmarks of the developed countries’ way of life would not exist but for debt promotion and below-market interest rates. Many of the assets listed on individual and corporate balance sheets are debt, somebody else’s liability. The borrower expects the return on investment or speculation will be higher than the interest rate he or she must pay. The majority of lenders lend, notwithstanding low rates, because they are either interest-rate-insensitive central banks or must generate some sort of return to fund future liabilities (pension funds) or present lifestyles (retirees).

Once debt starts contracting, speculative flows reverse first, because speculation is the most leveraged economic activity. Contracting credit is a margin call, and assets whose prices had been bid up as credit expanded must be sold to meet the claims of creditors. Because it is impossible to satisfy all claims (especially when many financial assets are collateral for multiple loans, our present situation), debt must be written off and losses realized, threatening creditor solvency. They sell assets and the cycle turns vicious. While it is unclear how much rising wealth promotes economic activity on the way up—the much ballyhooed wealth effect—wealth destruction accompanies economic contraction on the way down. People cannot spend paper wealth they no longer have and against which they can no longer borrow.

Expanding debt cannot “solve” the economic problem of too much debt any more than another drink can solve alcoholism. Additional debt became an unbearable burden before 2008—costs exceeded benefits, as the housing bust and financial crisis made clear—and the world has added almost $30 trillion since then. What was obvious to Washington Irving in 1820 remains obvious. The remedies pursued the last five years have been blind to the consequences and counterproductive. Governments and central banks’ debt expansion has only delayed and ultimately will amplify the economic and social pain. The end of quantitative easing this month will take the blame for recent global equity weakness. It shouldn’t; at most it hastens by a few months the collapse of a skyscraper of cards as the “superstructure, built upon credit and reared by speculation, crumbles to the ground, leaving scarce a wreck behind.

TGP_photo 2 FB

Amazon

Kindle

Nook