Tag Archives: GDP

Debt Is the Third Benjamin Franklin ‘Certainty’, by David Stockman

Like SLL, David Stockman thinks the long-term slowing trend in the US economy has something to do with the long-term increase in US debt. From David Stockman at dailyreckoning.com:

Benjamin Franklin supposedly said, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”

If old Ben were still around he would surely add “debt” to his famous saying. Indeed, a recent Experian study of its 220 million consumer files actually proves the case.

It turns out that 73% of consumers who died last year had debts which averaged nearly $62,000. In addition to the kind of debt that apparently always stays with you — credit cards and car loans — it also happened that 37% of the newly deceased had unpaid mortgages and 6% still had student loans with an average unpaid balance of $25,391!

Once upon a time people used to have mortgage burning ceremonies when later in their working years the balance on the one-time loan they took out in their 30s to buy their castle was finally reduced to zero.

And there was no such thing as student loans, and not only because students are inherently not credit worthy. College was paid for with family savings, summer jobs, work study and an austere life of four to a dorm room.

No more. The essence of debt in the present era is that it is perpetually increased and rolled-over. It’s never reduced and paid-off.

To be sure, much of mainstream opinion considers that reality unremarkable — even evidence of economic progress and enlightenment. Keynesians, Washington politicians and Wall Street gamblers would have it no other way because their entire modus operandi is based not just on ever more debt, but more importantly, on ever higher leverage.

The chart below not only proves the latter point, but documents that over the last four decades rising leverage has been insinuated into every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy.

Nominal GDP (dark blue) grew by 6X from $3 trillion to $18 trillion, whereas total credit outstanding (light blue) soared by 13X from $5 trillion to $64 trillion.

Consequently, the national leverage ratio rose from 1.5X in 1980 to 3.5X today.

My point today is not to moralize, but to discuss the practical implications of the nation’s debt-topia for Ben Franklin’s other two certainties — death and (especially) taxes.

To continue reading: Debt Is the Third Benjamin Franklin ‘Certainty’

Why The (Collapsing) Global Credit Impulse Is All That Matters: Citi Explains, by Tyler Durden

One reason to suspect that the debt party is just about over is that credit growth has gone negative. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

One week ago, we reported that UBS has some “very bad news for the global economy”, when we showed that according to the Swiss bank’s calculations, the global credit impulse showed a historic collapse, one which matched the magnitude of the impulse plunge in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis.

But why is the credit impulse so critical?

To answer this question Citi’s Matt King has published a slideshow titled, appropriately enough, “Why buying on impulse is soon regretted”, in which he explains why this largely ignored second derivative of global credit growth is really all that matters for the global economy (as well as markets, as we will explain in a follow up post).

King first focuses on the one thing that is “wrong” with this recovery: the pervasive lack of global inflation, so desired by DM central banks.

As he notes in the first slide below, “the inflation shortfall isn’t new” and yet the current “level of credit growth would traditionally have seen inflation >5%”

To be sure central banks always respond to this lack of inflation by injecting massive ammounts of liquidity, i.e., credit, in the system: according to Citi, the credit addiction started in 1982 in the UK, while in 2009 it was in China. However, there was a difference: while in the 1982 episode, it took 3 credit units to grow GDP by 1 unit, by 2009 this rate had grown to 6 to 1. Meanwhile, central bankers “simply stopped worrying about credit.” That also explains the chronic collapse in interest rates starting in 1980 with the “Great Moderation” and their recent record lows: the world simply can not tolerate higher rates.

And while the central bank experiment had limited success in stimulating inflation, there was one obvious consequence: credit fuelled asset bubbles around the world.

This is where the credit impulse comes into play: it allows market participants to track the instantaneous change in central banks’ credit creation, and more importantly,  The change in the flow of credit drives GDP growth.

To continue reading: Why The (Collapsing) Global Credit Impulse Is All That Matters: Citi Explains

It Took $4 In New Debt To Create $1 In GDP, by Tyler Durden

Does an economy even grow if it’s debt increases more than its growth? It now takes $4 buck to produce $1’s worth of GDP, so are we growing? From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Bill Gross’ letter discussing the credit deluge hitting the US came out at a convenient time: just as the Federal Reserve released its latest Flow of Funds report, which while most track to show the change in average household net worth – which is almost entirely a function of the stock market – we find it far more valuable for its nuanced information on the breakdown of US debt. And while it showed that in the fourth quarter, the net worth of US residents, mostly the wealthy ones as the bulk of financial assets is held by a small fraction of the total population, rose by $2 trillion to $92 trillion mostly as a result of a $1.5 increase in financial assets….

… we were more interest in the aggregate picture.

It wasn’t pretty.

As a reminder, according to the latest BEA revision, nominal 2016 GDP was $18.86 trillion, an increase of $632 billion from 2015; the question is how much credit had to be created to generate this growth. Well, according to the Z.1, total credit rose to a new record high $66.1 trillion. This was an increase of $2.511 trillion in the past year. It means that in 2016, it “cost” $4 in new debt to generate just $1 in new economic growth!

To continue reading: It Took $4 In New Debt To Create $1 In GDP

Back Below “Stall Speed”: 2016 Economy Matches Worst Year since Great Recession, by Wolf Richter

The economy is loaded with too much debt to achieve much in the way of growth. Is it even really growth when the overall debt load is growing faster than the economy? From Wolf Richter at wolfstreet.com:

Gutted Hopes for a Strong Finish.

The consensus forecast by economists predicted that the US economy would grow at an rate of 2.2% in the fourth quarter, as measured by inflation-adjusted GDP. The forecasts ranged from 1.5% to 2.8%. The New York Fed’s “Nowcast” pegged it at 2.1%, and the Atlanta Fed’s “GDPNow” at 2.9%. And today, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that growth in the fourth quarter was a measly 1.9%.

That was down from 3.5% in the third quarter, a spurt that had once again given rise to the now gutted hopes that the US economy would finally emerge from its stall speed. But instead it has slowed down.

For the year 2016, the growth rate dropped to 1.6%. It was worse even than 2013, when GDP growth tottered along at 1.7%. And it matched the growth rate in 2011. Both 2016 and 2011 were the worst since 2009 when the US was in the middle of the Great Recession:

In fact, over the past 50 years, anytime the economy grew less than 2% in a year, it was either already in a recession for part of the year, or there’d be a recession the following year. Hence “stall speed” – a speed that is too slow to keep the economy from stalling altogether.

To continue reading: Back Below “Stall Speed”: 2016 Economy Matches Worst Year since Great Recession

Why this Economy Feels Even Lousier than the Lousy GDP Print: Your Slice of the Economic Pie is Shrinking, by Wolf Richter

What happens when you start looking at economic statitistics on a per capita basis? They look even worse than the usually reported aggregate numbers. From Wolf Richter at wolfstreet.com:

The meme that 14 million jobs have been created since the Great Recession is constantly held up as proof that the labor market has healed, or has practically healed, even if there are a few soft spots left over – such as the pandemic lousiness of the jobs that have been created.

In official circles, the sound of folks patting themselves on the back is deafening. But for many working-age Americans, who have to compete with each other in the labor market, reality is tough.

Turns out, the US population, currently at 323.2 million, has grown by 16.5 million people since the Great Recession. Which is exactly why the unemployment problem has become so intractable: job growth has been less than population growth!

While slow economic growth might look OK-ish on paper overall, but in a country with significant population growth, it’s toxic on a per-capita level – and that per-capita level isn’t theoretical. It’s what people actually experience.

That scenario just played out with the Advance Estimate for first-quarter GDP, released on Thursday. Economic growth compared to the prior quarter was a miserably small 0.5% annualized, which means if the rest of the year is like this, total economic growth for the year will be 0.5%.

These numbers are adjusted for a version of inflation. One tiny understatement of inflation, purposefully or by statistical accident, would drive this “real” economic growth into the negative, meaning economic shrinkage. That’s bad enough.

But on a per-capita basis it’s even worse.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis, which produces the GDP reports, hushes up per-capita GDP because it would look too awful and therefore is not a metric the public should know about. But Doug Short at Advisor Perspectives tracks per-capita GDP. He uses the population data made available by the St. Louis Fed, which gets its population data from, well, um, the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

You guessed it: the BLS could publish per-capita GDP without breaking a sweat as part of its release. It already has all the data. But no.

And here is why it needs to be hushed up: Per-capita economic growth in the first quarter compared to the prior quarter was negative 0.3%!

In other words, the economic pie grew at a barely noticeable annualized rate of 0.5%, but this slightly larger pie has to be cut into even more slices, and each slice shrank by 0.3%.
Since the Great Recession ended officially, there have been six quarters when per-capita GDP was negative. The 10-year moving average of per-capita GDP is now down to 0.46%, the lowest in the data series going back to 1969.

Compared to the first quarter 2015, per-capita GDP in the first quarter 2016 was 1.13% higher. This year-over-year change was so small that it is associated with recessions.

To continue reading: Why this Economy Feels Even Lousier than the Lousy GDP Print: Your Slice of the Economic Pie is Shrinking