Readers of this blog expect the recession to last redux

Back in June I asked you all “When will the U.S. economy recover?.” The response was basically either “there will be no recovery to speak of” or “recovery is a long way off.” The poll results are embedded below.

I asked a similar question as the new year began since arguably a ‘technical recovery’ is underway. This time I phrased the question How long will the recovery last?. The answers were again the same with the majority saying “We are not in a recovery.” Again, the poll results are embedded below.

Why you don’t believe in the recovery

When I put the question up two weeks ago, I phrased it ambiguously on purpose because I wanted you to explain why you would answer one way or another. Here is a sampling of some of the responses:

Very nice. A group who does not believe a recovery is defined by bouncing along the bottom with no investment nor prospect of investment nor anything good to say about credit growth, employment or the outlook for consumers. My compliments to your readership.

Here’s another good one:

It’s not a recovery, it’s a stimulus.

Once the stimulus is removed the only thing that will turn out to have grown will be the debt, which will be unsustainable and will eventually bring about default and collapse on a scale never seen before.

Another take on the same meme says:

We are not in a recovery because job growth is not happening. We are recycling the same dollars between ourselves and our communities. I saw a chart that listed the top job growth sectors, almost all of them service jobs. Where are the manufacturing jobs? We produce almost NOTHING! Those who took bailout funds are not lending yet they continue to increase interest rates on credit cards. Cable bills, cell phone bills continue to go up yet hourly rates do not. People around me are getting fired/laid off/let go left and right. Where is this recovery happening?

I think you get the point. This cartoon kind of sums it up. But, this comment gets not only to the general feeling that things are not headed in the right direction, but the anger:

One trusts words like "recovery" when something substantial, not something will-‘o-the-wispish or ethereal, grounds them. The reality seen to be "recovering" of itself must have experienced something approximating permanence to be perceived as such. Ours is a house of cards responding like some ventriloquist’s dummy to the manipulation of desperate charlatans intent on finding some vindication in their chicanery. In any case what permanence is there in a "recovery" seen by many as a near-term adjustment in a more fundamental, longer term nose-dive and, particularly, one directed by such snakes? Ask yourself if the vermin that created the crisis possess the skills to resolve it. Only a politician or a lobbyist might say yes to this question.

So this is a fake recovery then?

So what do I think?  Pretty much what I have said before in two posts whose themes bear repeating here.  Here’s the message from the first. Last April, I wrote about the fake recovery I suspected was due to come. I said:

This is a fake recovery because the underlying systemic issues in the financial sector are being papered over through various mechanisms designed to surreptitiously recapitalize banks while monetary and fiscal stimulus induces a rebound before many banks’ inherent insolvency becomes a problem.  This means the banking system will remain weak even after recovery takes hold.  The likely result of the weak system will be a relapse into a depression-like circumstances once the temporary salve of stimulus has worn off.  Note that this does not preclude stocks from large rallies or a new bull market from forming because as unsustainable as the recovery may be, it will be a recovery nonetheless.

As I see it, this is what is now happening. Marshall’s post So what are banks for, anyway? points to the underlying insolvency which has been covered up through accounting and bailouts.  And of course, this is why banks are not lending – one reason the Obama bank tax is a bad idea (see my post Asymmetric information and corporate governance in bank bailouts for a more personalized account). As I indicated in the April post, the ‘fakeness’ of a recovery doesn’t preclude a cyclical bull market aka bear market rally.

The data say recovery though

Now, as to the data which underpins the rally and the recovery, let’s look at five areas: GDP, retail sales, personal income, production, and employment.

  • GDP is up. For Q3 2009, GDP was up 2.2% and for Q4 2009, Menzie Chinn recently pointed to forecasts of 4% when assessing the efficacy of recent stimulus measures. Clearly, output is up and has been increasing for half a year now. Many of you believe this is stimulus-related and therefore ‘fake’’ hence some of the comments above. Irrespective, we are likely to see another increase in GDP as inventory builds add to the cyclical agents supporting recovery.
  • Retail sales are up.  Despite the disappointing numbers for December, retail sales are up a lot year-on-year. Bottom line: the consumer is not dead.  Retail sales have been increasing since the summer. I will soon revisit the secular deleveraging theme in later posts. For now, suffice it to say, the consumer is hardly deleveraging in the U.S. or elsewhere. Why would one when interest rates are low and GDP is increasing?  People deleverage when they are forced to do so – and that’s not what is happening right now. Wait until the next downturn ; that’s when you will see deleveraging.
  • Personal income is up. It has been increasing every month since the summer. That’s why retail sales are up.  So, despite 10% unemployment, those people who have jobs are actually making more money. End of story.
  • Production is up. Look no further than the ISM manufacturing survey to see this. The ISM manufacturing index is at the highest level in nearly 4 years. It has been increasing since late summer. End of story.  As for the services sector, this too is increasing…if just barely.
  • Employment is the weakest link. This is where the problem lies. 10% unemployment, 17% underemployment, the loss of 85,000 jobs last month, the loss of 450,000 weekly, 40% unemployed for more than 6 months, structural issues. The employment picture is a mess. Yes, it is not nearly as dire as it was early in 2009. But, it is still a mess. I think we are in a secular trend. And that means problems down the line.

Let’s call this a technical recovery then

Overall, it sounds like a recovery to me. I anticipate that by late 2010 the NBER will make a recovery call and the date for its begin will be summer 2009 – just after I asked the recovery question the first time (sounds like the recency effect in action to me).. Of course, this is merely a technical recovery right now. The data on employment points to why. But, just to make clear what I mean when I say ‘technical recovery,’ I will quote from my July post which defined the term as I use it:

The period just following recession until the previous level of output before recession is re-attained is what I will term a ‘technical recovery.’ This is a time during which economic activity is increasing, but the economy is still operating below levels of the recent past.  Unemployment will still be rising and many businesses will still be going bankrupt. Because this period will still be very painful for many, it seems perverse to call it a recovery.  So, let’s use the term ‘technical recovery’ to describe this phenomenon.  That way, we all understand the reality behind the numbers.

Looking forward

The question of course is when are we going to reach that magical previous level of output. As I indicated in my post on jobless claims this week, employment at a minimum is likely to remain below previous highs for some time to come. David Rosenberg says we will need an additional 20 million jobs to get to get back to the previous employment population ratio peak of 63.7% in November 2007. That’s a lot of jobs.  I guarantee you we won’t create that many jobs for a decade at least. So this is clearly an economic depression we are experiencing. Right now, it is not a ‘Great’ Depression, but it is a depression nonetheless.

How do I see things progressing going forward? Here’s the message from the second post from October on how I see things (the full post is here).

So, what does this mean for the American and global economy?

  1. The private sector (particularly the household sector) is overly indebted. The level of debt households now carry cannot be supported by income at the present levels of consumption. The natural tendency, therefore, is toward more saving and less spending in the private sector (although asset price appreciation can attenuate this through the Wealth Effect).  That necessarily means the public sector must run a deficit or the import-export sector must run a surplus.
  2. Most countries are in a state of economic weakness. That means consumption demand is constrained globally. There is no chance that the U.S. can export its way out of recession without a collapse in the value of the U.S. dollar. That leaves the government as the sole way to pick up the slack.
  3. Since state and local governments are constrained by falling tax revenue (see WSJ article) and the inability to print money, only the Federal Government can run large deficits.
  4. Deficit spending on this scale is politically unacceptable and will come to an end as soon as the economy shows any signs of life (say 2 to 3% growth for one year). Therefore, at the first sign of economic strength, the Federal Government will raise taxes and/or cut spending. The result will be a deep recession with higher unemployment and lower stock prices.
  5. Meanwhile, all countries which issue the vast majority of debt in their own currency (U.S, Eurozone, U.K., Switzerland, Japan) will inflate. They will print as much money as they can reasonably get away with.  While the economy is in an upswing, this will create a false boom, predicated on asset price increases. This will be a huge bonus for hard assets like gold, platinum or silver.  However, when the prop of government spending is taken away, the global economy will relapse into recession.
  6. As a result there will be a Scylla and Charybdis of inflationary and deflationary forces, which will force the hands of central bankers in adding and withdrawing liquidity. Add in the likely volatility in government spending and taxation and you have the makings of a depression shaped like a series of W’s consisting of short and uneven business cycles. The secular force is the D-process and the deleveraging, so I expect deflation to be the resulting secular trend more than inflation.
  7. Needless to say, this kind of volatility will induce a wave of populist sentiment, leading to an unpredictable and violent geopolitical climate and the likelihood of more muscular forms of government.
  8. From an investing standpoint, consider this a secular bear market for stocks then.  Play the rallies, but be cognizant that the secular trend for the time being is down. The Japanese example which we are now tracking is a best case scenario.

Things are certainly shaping up exactly as I indicated. And if stimulus starts being withdrawn this year – as I believe it will be – expect a recession sooner than later. When this possibility comes into focus, the present cyclical bull market will come under pressure. And when asset prices start to fall, this whole asset-based recoverywill start to look troubled indeed.

Comments are appreciated.

  1. Jo says

    You are so right about what’s coming; that’s why we have to start dropping the regime-preservers (fbi,mi5 etc) right now.


  2. Stevie b. says

    Well Ed, I am an ignoramus, so as an ignoramus I respectfully disagree. There is no way stimulus will start to be withdrawn this year in anything but a token way. There is no way that the PTB will risk falling into the Japanese syndrome. If the consequences of inaction are a falling $, so very, very much the better – if they can get away with it, especially as so many other major developed currencies need to fall too. Let’s just get to some inflation and then we can fight the next fight and hope like hell something comes along to bail us out – and it just might, as i alluded to previously.

    I am delighted to see that in voting for 2013, I was the bottom of the pile, so as a consequence I am embolded to feel I’ve got a sporting chance of being right. After all, just look at your previous poll!

  3. Advocatus Diaboli says


    What do you think about my post and commentary. Too many people still believe in the “they deserve it” and “it will never happen to me” fairy tales.

    Sometimes pictures can say what words cannot..

  4. demandside says

    Not buying even the “technical” recovery. In the business cycle there needs to be investment. There is no investment. There needs to be credit growth. There is no credit growth.

    You have an increase in GDP simply because demand=supply and the federal government is demanding an extra 7.5 percent or something of GDP. If “recession” and “recovery” have any meaning, it is in the context of the business cycle. The business cycle is broken.

    It is lying under a mountain of debt. You can call it a recovery and maybe convince people that up is up, so it must be a recovery. But this economy is going nowhere, has no pulse, nor respiration. It is the zombie recovery.

  5. fresnodan says

    The whole problem with GDP and rate of growth, is that it can be going up dramatically, but most people are still unemployed or under employed.
    It is very much like having 100 dollars in the market. It goes down 50% (you have 50$). It than goes up 60% – everybody goes on and on about how the market it way up. But look at how much in in your account (80$ now) – you are in fact worse off. Its in the interest of stock market shills not to be aware of this. Why it is in the interest of economists not to be aware of the analogous circumstance????

  6. Anonymous says

    Even if private debt is purged and reaches a more reasonable level within a few years thanks to a significant increase of private savings, how will you then start to reduce fiscal deficit without restarting the “private debt – credit economy” rationale?

    I understand that you suggest that deleveraging private debt and purging malinvestment would allow the resetting and restarting of the machine, but in a globalized economy where the secular trend is unit labour cost deflation, how will you then increase aggregated demand in the middle and long term without increasing private debt/GDP rate?

    1. Edward Harrison says

      The answer of course is acombination of debt forgiveness, bankruptcy and
      debt repudiation.

      Sent from my mobile phone

      1. LavrentiBeria says

        Yes, and where debt forgiveness ought to be an idea that just shines through in an environment in which creditors have been so obviously responsible for the need for their taking such a step in the first place, the only alternatives will be debt repudiation and bankruptcy. Michael Hudson speaks of a debt jubilee, a splendid idea in my mind, but, then again, Hudson see things from a human perspective that gets short shrift, if that, from the political vermin in office solely to promote their careers through the accomodation of their campaign war chest paymasters. Perhaps there will come a day that the continued liberty of these creditors and their political butlers will depend on their willingness to embrace such a concept. While the law may exist at present for those that purchase it, a few years more of what we’ve just had and there may come a time where that notion gets turned on its head.

  7. Anonymous says

    et’s look at five areas: GDP, retail sales, personal income, production, and employment.

    you’re using BEA BLS FED data that dont have any link w/ reality..
    here’s real facts…

    #retail sales UP
    NO… according salex taxes down y/y about 10%.. those figures just dont square…

    #personal income
    NO.. according monthly treasury statement federal pers income tax down 20 % y/ from BEA is bullshit..

    yes.. its bad… you dont understand how bad it is..

    according daily treasury statement unemplyement benefits UP 200 pct
    y/y ( yes 200).. so real mothly losses still around 400,000 and still worse then bottom of 2001 -2002 resseion..

    dont get me started… 2009 FEDRAL DEFICIT IS freaking 1.9 $ trln..
    3 month deficit in 2010 fin year is about 400 bln $… course it up..

    well you get the picture..

  8. Anonymous says

    If Goldman Sachs were the only existing US employer, and they employed 10% of the labor force, and GDP grew at 6% per year, we would not be in a recession. We would also have 90% unemployment.

    1. Edward Harrison says

      That’s pretty funny!

      Sent from my mobile phone

  9. Anonymous says

    ow, as to the data which underpins the rally and the recovery, let’s look at five areas: GDP, retail sales, personal income, production, and employment.
    waste of time..
    typical BS.. using data from BEA BLS FED etc… it’s a joke..

    #GDP is up. For Q3 2009, GDP was up 2.2% and
    really…you forgot to mention 15 pct budget deficit.. aka 1.9 tlrn $

    #Retail sales are up. Despite th
    really,, then why is salex taxes down 10 pct from 2009.. see

    #Personal income is up. It has bee
    really… why is personal income taxes down 20 pct form 2009.. see monthly treasury statement..

    #Production is up. Look no further
    see cash for clunkers and bugget deficit..

    #Employment is the weakest link. This is w
    # nearly as dire as it was early in 2009.

    CHECK out unempl benefits in daily treasury statement its 200 percent
    form 2009… ( yes 200).. its still worse than in bottom of 2001-2002 reccesion…

    i guess you just loaded up on stuff in march 2009 and now peddles BS to sell in to suckers..


  10. CrisisMaven says

    Some things you can “bank” on is this MOAR – Mother of All Recessions: Of Mortgage Brokers, ARMs, Attrition and Marathons and … there’s no such thing as a recovery: How GDP betrays the Economy

Comments are closed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More