THE "GLOOM AND DOOMERS" FIND COMPANY

For over four decades, observant and open-minded individuals have become deeply concerned about the future of our great nation. They refused to accept the rosy official and media testimony regarding our nation's fiscal and monetary integrity. Similarly, they did not believe the negative rhetoric directed towards gold. Just as these independent thinking and far-sighted people recognized that one plus one would always equal two they also knew that no one, nor no nation, could create something from nothing. Throughout this period they witnessed the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve banking system work together to create U.S. dollars from thin air, in order to finance our growing national budget deficits. It was not only obvious to these people that inflation must result from our government's actions, but that numerous economic and financial distortions would occur and likely ultimately spawn a serious economic decline. They had learned from history of the damage that accrued to the lives of the common man, whenever a nation debased its currency.

Stable prices within an economy are produced when there is a balance between the purchasing media in its financial system, and the amount of goods and services offered on its markets. However, when the dollar value of the available items and services remain essentially constant, but a country's money stock is increased, the additional monetary units will over time act to bid up their domestic prices. This is what has occurred in America during the past six decades, since the U.S. left the Gold Standard. It is the underlying cause of the loss of the dollar's purchasing power.

According to extensive research performed by the outstanding American Institute for Economic Research (AIER, Great Barrington, Massachusetts), "For roughly 150 years after the Mint Act of 1792, by which Congress established and defined the Nation's currency, the purchasing power of the dollar fluctuated in a relatively narrow range. At the end of World War II, the price level was close to the peaks (and the purchasing power close to the troughs) reached after the War of 1812, the Civil War, and World War I".

During the preponderance of this period the dollar was defined as being worth a fixed amount of gold. Under the Gold Standard, dollars could not be created unless there was sufficient gold held by our government to redeem them. Further, during most of this era gold and dollars could be readily exchanged for one another by our government. This all changed with the signing of the Bretton Woods Agreement in1944.

After 1944, the dollar's purchasing power began to decline. This accelerated after President Nixon "closed the gold window" in 1971. With the stroke of a pen he severed the final link of the dollar to gold. Later, in the words of the AIER, "By 2000, the dollar had lost more than 90% of its original purchasing power."

The term "doom and gloomers" was likely coined by a member of the Establishment. It was done in an effort to discredit those who recognized this condition as well as their beliefs. This occurred because the "doom and gloomers"recognized early that the excessive issuance of dollars effectively cheapened those that already existed, and would lead to a number of damaging results. First, it would create inflation. Next, the higher prices and inflated money supply would excessively stimulate the economy. These events, in turn, would foster a number of other economic and financial distortions. Businesses and individuals would make poor economic and financial decisions. They would base their actions upon an economy which was artificially stimulated by excessive monetary creation. Their judgements and actions would be predicated upon fleeting, exceptional business conditions that were largely created as the newly issued dollars worked their way through the system. Businesses would expand their workforces, factories and products. Additionally, they and individuals would enter into far greater debt than was truly warranted because they believed that the "good times" would last longer than they should. The excessive monetary creation, in turn, would ultimately destroy the dollar's value on the world's markets, and further exacerbate the price inflation within our borders as the cost rose of imported goods.

Now, conditions have worsened to a far greater extent that anyone could have dreamed possible prior to the 1990's. Each recession since the Great Depression was met with greater amounts of monetary and fiscal stimulus in order to extricate the economy from any economic reversal. Whenever the economy began to flounder, the money supply would be rapidly expanded and interest rates would be cut by the Fed, while the government enacted tax reductions and spending increases. Importantly, during the past several years, the Fed appears to have become hell-bent upon creating as many dollar credits as are necessary. This, in order to prevent the economy from lapsing into any sort of extended or even minor recession, for fear of it snow-balling into something of far greater consequence.

Finally, the "doom and gloomers" are being joined by other voices. However, now they are emanating from the Establishment! Comments and declarations are now being espoused by those who are not only highly respected and authoritative, but who also hold among the most powerful positions in the world's governing and cooperative bodies.

This morning's New York Times contained an article entitled "I.M.F. Warns of Imbalance in World Consumption". The piece contained quotes from a recent IMF report. It began with "The United States is likely to experience slower economic growth next year, and its rapidly rising foreign debt is at the heart of dangerous global imbalances...". The Times then continued and stated, "The fund said that global economic growth had become too dependent on a handful of countries, led by the United States, that consume far more than they produce. That imbalance, it warned in its semiannual World Economic Outlook, could lead to a wrenching correction".

For the International Monetary Fund to use phrases such as "dangerous global imbalances" and "wrenching correction" when referring to the possible outcome of today's global economic and financial condition, is truly unprecedented! They could have used far more subtle terms, as they have in the past to get their point across, if they did not deeply believe that the world's economy was at great risk.

The Times article went on: "In an evident reference to the United States, with its big budget deficits and relentless consumer spending, the I.M.F. warned that the world's consumption is 'fueled by increasingly unsustainable fiscal stimulus, as well as housing prices that are ignoring the laws of gravity".

With these strong statements of concern, if not outright fear, I believe that the IMF is sending a scathing message. It is not only to the United States but to the rest of the world, that the worst fears of the "doom and gloomers" not only have validity, but that they may come to fruition if major structural changes in the U.S. do not occur. This stern warning was for the United States to limit its dangerous monetary expansion, increase its taxes, and force its consumers to reign in their wonton spending. Or, not only the U.S. but the world would suffer the consequences.

These alarming statements by one of the world's preeminent organizations followed a similar statement by the president of the Federal Reserve Bank, Alan Greenspan. In a recent speech, Mr. Greenspan discussed the historical precedent that resulted whenever investors became overly excited about certain investments. This occurred when buyers threw caution to the wind and ignored the risks produced by their actions, by driving prices to unsupportable high levels. He stated , "Thus, this vast increase in the market value of asset claims is in part the indirect result of investors accepting lower compensation for risk. Such an increase in market value is too often viewed by market participants as structural and permanent. ... But what they perceive as newly abundant liquidity can readily disappear. Any onset of increased investor caution elevates risk premiums and, as a consequence, lowers asset values and promotes the liquidation of the debt that supported higher asset prices. This is the reason that history has not dealt kindly with the aftermath of protracted periods of low risk premiums."

Greenspan, with his statement, "vast increase in the market value", is referring to the current enormous overvaluation of the housing market and, I believe, stock prices. He appears in total agreement with the IMF statement that, "housing prices that are defying the laws of gravity". Do you remember Greenspan's famous 1996, "irrational exuberance" speech regarding the stock market? At that time, the Dow Industrials were in the mid-6000 range. Do you believe that he views the market as being less overvalued and less dangerous with the Dow today in the mid 10,000's?

Greenspan's reference to "history has not dealt kindly with the aftermath of protracted periods of low risk premiums" is his "fed-speak", sugar-coated fashion of addressing the likely severe and damaging economic fall-out when price levels return to normal.

I believe that these unnerving observations by Alan Greenspan and the IMF are likely the tip of the iceberg! As time passes, I feel that similar statements will be espoused by more and more conventional economists and government officials. They will be preparing the world for a potential economic melt-down that was created by our nation's prolonged, egregious, deficit spending campaign, and the creation of the enormous amount of dollar credits that they fostered.

The voices of the "doom and gloomers" will be increasingly joined by those emanating from mainstream America. They will be vindicated! However, just as all Americans benefited from the higher standard of living generated by the decades-long artificially induced boom, we may all have to suffer the consequences when the business cycle turns down, and the contrived boom turns to bust.

I realize that my analysis of the comments by the IMF and Alan Greenspan are disconcerting. However, I believe that it is better to face the reality and truth of a situation and prepare for its consequences, than to put one's head in the sand and ignore its reality and its potential damaging effects. My hope is to help the reader recognize our nation's precarious condition, and prepare for the difficult times that lie somewhere ahead.

Core CPI doesn't include food, energy or home ownership.

You may want to go to the BLS website and look up Owner's Equivalent Rent. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, calculates a data series called Owners' Equivalent Rent, which measures the implicit financial value of home ownership. The rising cost of home ownership is absolutely included in the CPI.

Through July of this year the core CPI was 2.1%. The CPI, including food and energy, was 3.2%. During the 19-year bull market that began in 1982, the average annual CPI change was 3.3%.

Business Week

With the 10-year bond yielding 4.3%, this all sounds reasonable, unless of course, you are someone who thinks they know more than the bond market and all the others who buy our debt instruments.

They rely successfully on widespread economics illiteracy among the U.S. population.

I guess you do know more than the markets. You must be a very wealthy individual.

You may want to go to the BLS website and look up Owner's Equivalent Rent. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, calculates a data series called Owners' Equivalent Rent, which measures the implicit financial value of home ownership. The rising cost of home ownership is absolutely included in the CPI.

Since rents are not in line with house prices, this understates housing inflation.

The Federal Reserve commissioned a 52-page study on the subject. In it, they discussed the impact of housing demand on the OER component of the consumer price index. They found:

"Downward pressure on rental prices mainly resulted from an increase in demand for homeownership, which was spurred by historically low mortgage interest rates (see Figure 19). As housing starts and home sales surged in the recent recession and recovery, the national rental vacancy rate jumped from 7.8 percent in the fourth quarter of 2000 to 10.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2003. This effect was compounded by the way owner-occupied housing prices are measured in the CPI. The CPI uses a rental-equivalence approach, measuring the value of the shelter services an owner receives from his or her home. Price movements in owners' equivalent rent reflect changes in prices of rental units that are comparable in characteristics to owner-occupied homes. Therefore, increased demand for homeownership put downward pressure not only on tenants' rent but also on owners' equivalent rent -- the largest component in the CPI."

I guess you do know more than the markets. You must be a very wealthy individual.

Don't you have any other lines?

Since rents are not in line with house prices, this understates housing inflation.

Home real estate is subjective to value. Establishing a fair value for housing for the purpose of calculating the CPI is difficult at best. However, hubbubhubbub said that CPI calculations don't include home ownership. Is this a statement you wish to defend?

The old method of calculating housing inflation used the actual increase in home prices. How many people would be affected by this methodology given that, what, less than 10% (?), of Americans buy a new home every year? The old method was notoriously inaccurate. The new method still overstates the impact of rising home values on the US population.

If I bought my home 5 years ago for $250,000 and it's now worth $500,000 what is the inflationary impact of this appreciation on my family? My mortgage is still the same. The only expenses that increase are my property taxes and insurance. This is the case for the vast majority of homeowners every year.

If equivalent rent went up 50% while my home doubled in value, over that five-year period, rents would not be in line with house prices but the rate of inflation would still be overstated.

I agree with Alan Reynolds (Illusory Inflation) that the way in which we calculate CPI overstates the rate of inflation. The bond market seems to agree as well.

Don't you have any other lines?

What, you don't agree with me that anyone who knows more (or better) than the markets ought to be very wealthy? You're right though, I do ask the question often but I never seem to get an answer.

So, how do you think housing inflation should be calculated? Show it somehow be based on monthly mortgage payment? Using whatever method you think it correct, what is the true inflation rate?

I don't believe there should be a politburo attempting to centrally manage and manipulate the economy.

As far as inflation, M3 has been averaging 8% per year for the last decade.

If I bought my home 5 years ago for $250,000 and it's now worth $500,000 what is the inflationary impact of this appreciation on my family?

In many cases it alters the family's spending habits as they extract equity from their homes.

I agree with Alan Reynolds

I'm a supporter of CATO, but this one issue we don't see eye to eye on. I've even briefly argued the subject with William Niskanen.

Its a Chicago vs. Austrian thing. Only time will tell (of course both camps will simply have different interpretations)

This stern warning was for the United States to limit its dangerous monetary expansion, increase its taxes, and force its consumers to reign in their wonton spending.

Hmmm. Why is it that DECREASING GOVERNMENT SPENDING is never considered a possible remedy? Sure, raise taxes some more! That'll stop all the peons out there from engaging in "wonton spending."

I don't believe there should be a politburo attempting to centrally manage and manipulate the economy.

I guess each state should manage the money supply? Maybe each person?

As far as inflation, M3 has been averaging 8% per year for the last decade.

Great, so that translates into an inflation rate of what?

I guess each state should manage the money supply?

Noooo.

Maybe each person?

Yes, let the free market pick the medium of exchange.

As far as inflation, M3 has been averaging 8% per year for the last decade. Great, so that translates into an inflation rate of what?

Bout 8%.

"So, how do you think housing inflation should be calculated?"

My answer: "very carefully." We could start with considering the size of the house when looking at the prices-- in 1950 median home size was 900 square feet -- in 2000 it was 2100.

I did a rough comparison of real square foot home costs to real wages and found from 1980 to 2000 that wages grew slightly better.

What makes it more interesting is quality-- modern homes now include central air conditioning, garages replacing carports, safer electrical work etc (more info here).

Bottom line ---being a doom'n'gloomer in this age has got to take more and more effort.

In many cases it alters the family's spending habits as they extract equity from their homes.

Do you subscribe to the belief that Americans are addicted to debt and don't save? I hope not because it's all myth. Just look at the most recent Fed figures on household net worth - $50 trillion - with only about 20% of that attributable to homeowner equity. The average American household has about 57% equity in their home. Americans' total debts, including mortgages, are dwarfed by their liquid assets. Household net worth is double what it was just 10 years ago.

In 2004, our credit card debt rose by just 4% while we increased our financial assets by $590 billion. What's truly remarkable is that our per capita liquidity exceeds that of Japan - a country known for it's high savings rate.

The Commerce department doesn't count capital gains when they tally the national savings rate. Since 1997, American's have cashed in a total of $3.5 trillion in capital gains which is more than the combined total of the past 20 years.

Isn't it hard to be a doom and gloomer in light of all this good news?

Its a Chicago vs. Austrian thing.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.