No Green Shoots with US
Debt at 700% of GDP
What have we learned in 2,000 years?
"The budget should be
balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced,
the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and
the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest
Absolutely nothing it would seem!!!
Ben Bernanke and others including President
Obama have suggested that recent economic data could be signaling the early
stages of an economic recovery, hence the “green shoots” analogy. Equally however
I am reminded of the old saying: “One swallow doesn’t make a summer”.
So which shall it be: green shoots leading
to explosive blooms, with Fed members frolicking aimlessly and care-free in the
lush green fields of summer? Or will we find that an anxious Fed Chairman was peering
through extra strength sun glasses only to find a wayward swallow perching on
some dead wood? Or will we find that the green shoots really are there, brought
on by an Indian Summer, they grow a little (maybe even for a year) but meet a
brutal end as the harsh and unrelenting winter resumes.
If the green shoots theory is correct then
the recent surge in world stock markets could mark the beginning of a new bull
market in stocks. But if the Swallow and Indian Summer theory proves more
accurate then the relenting bear market will claim more victims as it shows that
dead cats dropped from multi-story buildings really do bounce. And after that: splat
!!!!!
There is no doubt that some recent data
including a small uptick in the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index,
an increase in monthly new home sales and the partial unfreezing of some areas
of the credit markets could be nascent signs of a turnaround, or at least a
stabilisation from recent quarters of near free-fall in economic data. If so
that would be a positive development. However these figures are from an
exceptionally low base, and one should be cautious about extrapolating one
month’s figures into the next boom.
For some time now Gary Schilling (www.agaryshilling.com)
has argued that the bursting of the world economic bubble would occur in four
distinct phases. Phases 1 and 2 were largely financial in nature whilst Phases
3 and 4 saw the problems in the financial sector flowing through to the real
economy. As Mr. Schilling sees it the phases are:
Phase 1: The
collapse of the housing sector, touched off by the subprime slime;
Phase 2: Spreading
of the woes to Wall Street;
Phase 3: Consumer
retrenchment; and finally
Phase 4: Globalisation
of the downturn.
I think that the financial crisis has
evolved pretty much on cue.
The purpose of this article is to look at
the current state of play i.e. where we are now in terms of the deleveraging
cycle and the state of the real economies.
How Much Further to Go in the Deleveraging
Cycle?
1. Overall Debt - Clearly excessive
debt is one of the core issues at the heart of the current malaise so it is
here that we must start. When looking at the question of deleveraging, one
needs to consider a number of different dimensions, including the state of the banking
and financial systems themselves, the state of the asset markets, the overall
level of debt in the economy as well as the level of indebtedness of the
various actors in the economy.
I think it worthwhile if we start at the
macro level and work down from there. A key indicator of the status of
deleveraging refers to the overall level of debt in the economy as measured by
total credit market debt. A graph prepared by Ned Davis Research shows that
Total Credit Market Debt for the
Not only is the current ratio of 350% the
highest on record but it far surpasses the peak of 300% that was reached in
1929. In the aftermath of the Great Depression total credit market debt
declined over the following two decades to reach a low of 130% in the
mid-1950s.
Some quick calculations show that based on a
modest savings rate of 4% and real GDP growth of 3% pa, zero interest payments and
the assumption that no more debt is created (which is unlikely given the
Federal Government’s proclivity to spend), it would take until about the year
2026 to get back to a more sustainable debt to GDP ratio of say 150%. At a
savings rate of 8% pa then you could get to the same level by about 2022.
When one includes unfunded liabilities, based
on the above criteria it would take until 2030 just to get back to the current
historically high rate of 350%.
Therefore based on the current trajectory of
debt creation and without some rather radical changes in policy it appears that
the
Analysis by Morgan Stanley highlights that
the composition of this debt has also changed since the 1930s, with the household’s
proportion of total debt increasing from 18% to 27% whilst corporate debt has
declined from 51% to 22%. Government and financial debt has also increased
significantly over that time. This suggests that consumer deleveraging will be
of paramount importance in any sustainable recovery in the
And the
These are indeed scary figures and it raises
the question: Can all of these debts ever be repaid? Based on current policy
settings by governments and central banks alike, I think the answer is a
definitive “No”, at least not without destroying the world’s fiat currencies,
massive write-downs and / or repudiation of debt. What it will require is a
shift back towards governments and central banks encouraging savings rather
than debt, and more fiscal responsibility on the part of governments. Green
shoots or Indian Summer? Which ever it is it will take more than a couple of
years downturn to resolve.
2. State of the
Financial System - As
many commentators have stated another key element in supporting a return to sustainable
growth is turning the troubled banking and financial system around. I think it
is pretty clear that we are not talking about just a liquidity issue here but
rather the solvency (or lack thereof) of the entire banking and financial
system. Recent estimates by the IMF suggest that total write-downs might reach
$4.1 Tn, well up on its previous estimates of $1.4 Tn and $2.2
In a recent article Satyajit Das, a
well-regarded Australian economist, stated that even after $900 billion in new
capital, the global banking system remains short of capital by around $1-2
trillion. This translates into an effective reduction in available credit of
around 20-30% from previous levels. Bank earnings and balance sheets remain
under pressure.
These figures support recent estimates by
Nouriel Roubini (www.rgemonitor.com)
that with projected write-offs, the US banks are currently some $400 Bn
underwater and that they will need at least $1.4 Tn to bring the capital of
banks back to the levels they were prior to the beginning of the crisis.
Clearly the Fed and the Government are doing
everything in their power to support the financial system. These measures
include the increase in spreads due to the ultra-low Fed funds rate, creating
money out of thin air, swaps for toxic waste as well as transfers via the likes
of AIG.
Unfortunately several recent developments in
the
The reality is that continuing to gloss over
these problems through dodgy bookkeeping only encourages greedy Wall Street
operatives to continue their giant immoral heist from the American people and
ultimately slows the adjustment process. We can only live in hope that one day
soon a number of these shonks are brought to justice and the industry cleaned
up.
In short I don’t see sufficient evidence at
this stage to suggest that either Wall Street has reformed its nauseous ways,
the government is on top of the situation or more importantly that the
financial system has stabilized in terms writing off losses and stabilizing its
capital base.
3. Assets Return to Fair Value - Another indication
that deleveraging has run its course will be when asset prices return to levels
supported by economic fundamentals. For example in a recent weekly commentary,
Comstock Partners (www.comstockfunds.com) showed that at their
zenith, house prices in the US reached a peak of 5.25 times median family
income compared to the long-term average (since 1965) of 2.75 times. They estimate
that house prices have declined to 3.45 times median family income which is
still 20% above the long term average. And this doesn’t take into account any
overshooting to the downside where prices could reasonably get down to 2.25
times median family income before reverting to the mean. So despite the
Government’s recent attempts to modify mortgages and forestall foreclosures,
with a significant overhang in inventories, increasing unemployment putting
pressure on people at all levels of the socio-economic spectrum as well as a
significant bulge in resets looming over the next several years it seems that
the housing market still has a couple of years to go before a bottom is
reached.
Of course the
Despite the recent share market rally and what
some analysts are saying, it appears to me that stock prices are still not
great value despite the already large declines in world stock prices. The
latest estimates from the S&P 500 (from S&P website), puts the forecast
As Reported earnings at $28.51 for 2009 and $35.31 for 2010. With the S&P
500 index currently at about 900, this puts the forecast P/E ratios at 31.7 for
2009 and 25.6 for 2010. These are not only well above the long-term average but
are certainly not the levels from which new bull markets are born.
As an alternative measure of share market
value, a number of analysts use 10 year smoothed earnings. With their estimates
currently hovering around $55, this would put the estimated P/E ratio at about 16.4.
This is double the P/E ratio that has generally marked the bottom of bear
markets. So it seems to me that despite this being the most severe recession /
depression since the Great Depression the price of shares in general do not
represent the values one would expect at the beginning of a new bull market.
More importantly share prices never really reached the puke point that would
mark the level of capitulation that one would expect in such a severe bear
market.
There are several further comments I would
like to add at this point. In the long-run stock prices should only grow in
line with nominal GDP growth, namely real GDP plus inflation. There are at
least five strong head-winds that are likely to work against strong GDP growth in
the foreseeable future. These are:
·
Firstly,
massive debt build-up throughout the world which still has to be liquidated. Repayment
of this debt and ongoing debt servicing commitments are going to detract from
GDP growth;
·
Secondly,
the demographic time-bomb awaiting many parts of the western world. This is
going to put immense pressure on the
·
Thirdly,
the fact that the past 10 year’s earnings have been pumped up by excessively
loose monetary policy which has fed through into excessive profits,
particularly in the financial sector. This was also reflected in the profit
share of GDP which reached record levels during this period;
·
Fourthly,
with the recent loss of “wealth” and massively under-funded pensions, many
baby-boomers are going to move into savings overdrive which is likely to lead
to a significant reduction in consumption; and finally
·
With
the recent decline in GDP and asset prices many companies will have
under-provided for their employees’ superannuation obligations. This will put a
drain on future profitability as companies are forced to top up these funds.
Alternatively companies will seek to reduce these obligations which will reduce
retirees’ income levels and thus lead to reduced aggregate demand.
The other issue likely to influence GDP
growth is whether one has deflation, or high inflation. Deflation would likely
impact company profits as it reduces pricing power whilst strong inflation
would reduce consumer’s purchasing power. So either way the upcoming period of
price instability is likely to impact GDP growth moving forward.
The final asset class which bears mentioning
is US Treasuries, which have risen strongly in price with the recent flight to
quality. Once again it is almost impossible to predict how prices and thus
yields will move in the medium term. Without wishing to sound like an economist
(i.e. on the one hand this and on the other hand that), there are some very
strong opposing forces currently in play. On one side we have significant
deleveraging, a weak world economy and declining asset prices, all of which are
deflationary and which are therefore keeping Treasury prices high. Conversely
we have unprecedented Government spending, aided and abetted by the Fed’s
monetary printing which could potentially lead to inflation and thus a reduction
in Treasury prices (i.e. an increase in yields which would surely snuff out any
green shoots).
With the need to fund the creation of new
debt as well as roll-over maturing debt, one has to ask how much further Treasuries
can rise or whether the authorities have created yet another bubble.
Alternatively one would need to assess what impact a sustained fall in their
prices would have on GDP if inflation is seen to pick up or growth unexpectedly
rises.
It seems to me that we still have a great deal
of pain to come as values for all asset classes come back to more normal levels,
supported by longer-term income streams and higher capitalisation rates which
include more normal premiums for risk.
Consumer Retrenchment and the State
of the Real Economy
It was interesting to see the Ben Bernanke recently
forecast a return to growth, albeit weak, by the end of 2009. Personally given
the Fed’s role in creating this crisis and poor forecasting record I would put
little faith in these comments. Having said that I retain an open mind to all
possibilities and will try to use basic analysis to guide my investment decisions.
I would like to start by looking at a
composition of the GDP. The table below shows the breakdown of the key
components of GDP for Qtr 1 2009 GDP in “annualized”, nominal seasonally
adjusted and percentage terms as well as for 2008.
GDP Component |
Qtr 1 2009 * |
% of GDP Q1 2009 |
2008 ($Bn) |
% of GDP 2008 |
Personal Consumption Expenditures -
Durable
Goods -
Nondurable
Goods -
Services
Sub-total |
964 2811 6181 9956 |
6.9 20.0 43.9 70.8 |
1023 2965 6070 10058 |
7.2 20.8 42.5 70.5 |
Gross Private Domestic Investment -
Nonresidential
o
Structures o
Equipment
& Software -
Residential -
Change
in Private Inventories Sub-total |
487
845
384 -
137 1579 |
3.5
6.0
2.7 -1.0 11.2 |
553 999 489 - 47 1994 |
3.9
7.0
3.4 -0.3 14.0 |
Net Exports and Imports -
Exports -
Imports Sub-total |
1537 -1874 -337 |
10.9 -13.3 -2.4 |
1860 -2529 -669 |
13.0 -17.7 -4.7 |
Federal Government (Consumption &
gross investment) -
Defense -
Non-defense
Sub-total |
749
354 1103 |
5.3
2.5 7.8 |
735 337 1072 |
5.2
2.4 7.5 |
State and Local Govt (Consumption &
gross investment) |
1775 |
12.6 |
1810 |
12.7 |
Total |
14076 |
100.0 |
14265 |
100.0 |
*
The following comments can be made in
relation to the above table and underlying figures:
1.
Personal Consumption - As most are aware, personal
consumption is currently the main determinant of GDP, particularly expenditure
on services. The main components of services are medical care (13% of total GDP),
housing (10.9%), household operations – electricity and gas etc (4%),
transportation (2.6%), recreation (3%) and other (10.3%).
Expenditure on
nondurable goods is also a significant component and includes items such as
food, clothing and footwear, gasoline and other basic necessities.
In October last year
I wrote an article entitled “Recession or Depression” www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/2008/1027.html
where I listed a number of structural headwinds that would severely impact the
·
A
savings rate that had fallen to negative territory and therefore must be
restored to historical levels of 8-10%;
·
A
reduction in mortgage equity withdrawals which near their peak totaled $800
billion per annum;
·
Mounting
housing foreclosures;
·
Consumers
living beyond their means and maxed out on their credit cards;
·
Tightening
credit forced on banks by the economic downturn, large losses and a reduction
in their capital bases;
·
Increasing
unemployment that would reduce aggregate demand; and
·
Negative
wealth effect due to losses in housing and the stock market.
All of these factors
remain as current now as they did back then and will impact consumption for at
least the next 12-18 months, particularly as unemployment continues to grow. However
these factors will in part be offset by lower energy prices and the government
stimulus package.
2.
Private Investment – This category includes IT
equipment and software (3.4% of GDP), other equipment (2.6%), investment in
nonresidential structures (3.5%), residential investment (2.7%) and changes in
private inventories (-1%). The downturn
has hit private investment particularly hard over the past 12 months, taking
over $400 Bn from GDP in this period. All component areas have been hit
resulting in the overall percentage contribution to GDP falling from 14% in
2008 to 11.2 % in Qtr 1 2009. It would seem that even if the economy is
stabilizing, and that remains to be seen, with increasing vacancy rates in all
categories of property, an overhang in residential housing stock, the financial
sector still consolidating and industrial utilization running at a low 69% that
fixed private investment is not going to contribute significant growth any time
soon. The only segment that may add to growth is an up-tick in inventories as
the current de-stocking runs its course.
However changes in
inventory levels have contributed on average only 0.5% to GDP from 1929 to 2008
with a maximum contribution of 2.9% coming in 1937 and 1951. With ongoing
uncertainty over the recovery and improved inventory management techniques the
contribution from re-stocking is likely to be far more modest when it does
return.
3.
Net Exports and Imports – The above table highlights
how the trade gap has narrowed over the past 12 months. This has resulted from
a large reduction of over $650 Bn in imports, which has overshadowed a $300 Bn reduction
in exports. With the IMF forecasting key economies such as
4.
Federal Government Expenditure – Despite the
recent commitment of trillions of dollars support by the Government, Federal
Government expenditure makes only a modest contribution to overall GDP. I think
one needs to differentiate between the large amount of funds and guarantees
made available to prop up the financial system versus actual expenditure which
contributes to GDP. Moreover defense expenditure is by far the largest
contributor to Federal Government expenditure. However the forthcoming stimulus
package of nearly $900 Bn will contribute positively to GDP over the next 12
months. The question remains as to how much slack it can take up from the other
areas. It is a large amount of money so clearly some.
5.
State and Local Governments – This category also
makes only a modest contribution to overall GDP. Moreover with its revenue
sources under threat from the property and economic downturn this sector is
unlikely to grow quickly anytime soon. In fact it is really in deep trouble and
will probably retrench staff and services for many years to come.
The Income Side of the National
Accounts
Another way of looking at the national
accounts is through the income side. By far the largest component of income is
employee compensation which comprises 57% of total national income. This is
followed by consumption of fixed capital (13%), proprietor’s income and
corporate profits (16.4%), taxes (6.9%) and finally interest and miscellaneous
payments (5.1%). With high unemployment, low industry utilization and profits
under pressure it would seem that none of these areas is set for significant
growth over the short term.
Findings
So are they the first green shoots of the
season, a lonely swallow or a slam dunk as winter resumes and snuffs out the
shoots. I think the above analysis suggests that:
1.
The
overall debt level in the
2.
Other
major economies in the world, namely Europe and
3.
House
prices still seem to have up to another 20% to fall to get back to historic valuation
levels.
4.
The
recent rally in shares has pushed P/E ratios back to medium to high levels,
certainly not the base from which sustainable bull markets normally commence.
5.
With
increasing unemployment, limited / no wage growth, the loss of asset-fuelled
consumption and the consumer needing to reduce debt and more importantly to
save, consumption is not going to be the driver of economic growth that it has
been over the past 2 decades.
6.
Given
low capacity utilization and deflationary forces, company profits are also
likely to be under pressure for the foreseeable future. Combine this with
increasing vacancy rates for all areas of real estate, then private fixed
investment is not likely to pick up significantly in the next 12-18 months.
7.
With
changes to the mark to market rules the US Government is basically instituting
a massive cover-up of the extent of the potential losses in the financial
system. The authorities are clearly seeking to buy time in the hope that credit
markets can repair themselves and thus avoid / delay the massive losses still
in the pipeline. The simple fact is that without this slight of hand it would
visible to all that the
Conclusions
1.
Whilst
the
2.
With
the stock market not cheap, the recent rally seems to more like a dead cat
bounce rather than the beginning of a new bull market.
3.
Significant
risks to the economy remain, the chief amongst them being:
a.
the
ability of the
b.
the
potential collapse in the bond market and / or the US dollar;
c.
greater
than expected losses from the housing and property markets; and
d.
ongoing
deleveraging in the financial market.
On balance I see more downside risk than
upside growth. Accordingly I think we will be saved from the sight of the Fed
Board members frolicking in the lush fields of summer. In summary, be cautious!