Interesting short read and set of charts on long term interest rate cycle of corporate bonds.
"There are important bottoms for interest rates which can be seen near the decadal marks of 1770, 1830, 1890, and 1950. Each of these bottoms arrives approximately 60 years after the prior one. The next major bottom for interest rates is ideally due in 2010, plus or minus. This cycle expectation just happens to coincide with the arrival of Baby Boomers at an age when they figure they ought to load up on bonds, just to be safe. So once again, Boomers are all piling into another financial asset type at precisely the wrong time."60-year_cycle_in_interest_rates
Comments
Inflation will return at some point. But over the next 10? years deflation is still the problem. Markets tend to over-correct so from the peak in the 80s it might extend the cycle.
Over the last 20 years most Develop Markets were able to export some of their inflation to exporting countries like China. By importing our credit (and inflation) countries like China are now trying to deal with inflation pressures while also trying to foster consumerism within their country.
At the beginning of the last interest cycle (long term credit cycle), WWII provided a mechanism for renewed consumption. I am hoping we can find a more peaceful set of reasons to increase levels of new consumerism globally.
It's times like this where I like to rewatch Ray Dalio's short video:
How the Economic Machine Works (I believe Catch 22 first brought it to my attention):
economicprinciples.org/
I know, I know: 66% of the Economy is consumer spending. Takes my breath away.
In general, decreased productivity due to less consumerism (regardless whether its for a piece of crap flat screen TV or for a productive piece of farm equipment) slows an economy.
To your point, I believe there's a lack of understanding on the part of most consumers and their ablility to differentiate between needs and wants. And when it comes to production...nothing worse and more dangerous than poorly made products.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304795804579097412611960306
That is what concerns me - here and elsewhere - push people to spend, spend, spend and that's the only focus. Meanwhile, core problems are pushed to the wayside and forgotten about (and get worse in the meantime) until they can't be ignored. We need to spend money on infrastructure, we need to address a lot of issues to try and be competitive globally and we're totally not.
It is ALL SHORT-TERM THINKING. There is no long-term plan.
Regards,
Ted
Regards,
Ted
Who Let The Dogs Out: Beha Men:
This whole consumption production cycle only works in a closed economy where there are no barriers to capital or labor.
A few decades ago, US consumed, US produced for it and the capital and labor benefited from it.
More recently, US consumed a lot, Asia produced for it and Brazil supplied the raw materials. Which would be fine if Capital and Labor were equally mobile across these countries, so people.could move to Brazil or China and benefit from the return on production there, but that is not the reality.
Asia and Latin America have to diversify to protect themselves from being dependent entirely on US consumerism because US labor is going through a income drought from the economic and political policies that rewards capital over labor rather strike a balance. Hence, the attempts to encourage local consumption. But that takes generations to get to the level of US consumerism. They don't have the same feeling of security.
The trajectory for US is to primarily become an exporter of capital from returns made on capital. This doesn't require much infrastructure. Not to say this is necessarily a good thing.
Further, there is very little in our market system which encourages the creation of anything of lasting value. Think about that for a moment. Think about the impact of that reality in every aspect of your life. Its quite depressing. I guess the antidote is to think about the amount of stuff that you spend money on that's really necessary.
I have a family member who joined a large brokerage right after he got out of college several years ago. He was fascinated with "the market". "The market" is always going to go up !, he would say. "The market" will sort things out. "Bulls", "Bears"; pithy bits of wisdom from market veterans. He was quite taken with it all. And then I asked him how much of what "the market" was producing was of any real value or really made human life any better. He was stumped -- not by the question itself, but by the fact that someone would think to pose such a question. "He who looks for humanity, will find no humanity here"...or, perhaps too much humanity.
There is a pair of books by a historian, Philip Scranton, I believe, who contrasted the early textile economies of Massachusetts (mass production) with those of the Schuylkill valley of Pennsylvania (specialty batch production). Early Schuylkill business owners worked to achieve a certain standard of living while maintaining quality; often retiring after they had obtained a "sufficiency". A novel idea, this "sufficiency". I almost wonder if it was a fantasy created by Scranton's interpretation of the data. Both models eventually crashed, however.
So, "the crowd is untruth", I say. "Live in the world but be not of it". I guess this is why I lean toward value investing, although I often fight the urge to give into the hype. My wife is stronger than me in this regard, and generally does a good job of keeping me on the straight and narrow.
Apologies if I veered a bit off topic here.
Your observations are right on. I won't say, this time, "right on the money."
Today manufacturing for the most part is clean, efficient, automated, and still a well paying industry. I hope that this country with its plentiful energy source (Natural Gas) once again embraces what made us the envy of the world. Not only have we closed down most of the factories (at least in the North) we have also stop encouraging kids to channel their talents into Math, Science and Technology.
'In'-frastructure starts 'in'-side each one of us.
We baby boomers are actually the consequence of another epic event, World War II. And yes, our influences on the U.S. economy have been profound and continue to this day. We've impacted interest rates (the theme of the thread as I see it), housing and real estate, the stock markets, schools, government deficits, medical care & costs - to name just a few.
Read interesting article in NY Times yesterday on the crisis in multi-employer pensions. Should be able to add link here shortly.
Here: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/04/12/thought-secure-pooled-pensions-teeter-and-fall/?ref=business&ref=business
Thanks for all the ideas