Replies

Here's the Prudent Bear Market Summary by Rob Peebles

Northern Trust’s insightful and understandable economist Paul Kasriel recently noted that the consumer spending spree during the bubble years was no mirage. In fact, consumer spending as a percentage of disposable personal income broke out of a 35-year range around 1995. Household net worth as a percent of disposable personal income did the same. More amazing, Kasriel notes that in the Postwar period, household net worth never declined year-end over year-end until 2000. It declined again last year, and Kasriel thinks it will come in lower still at year-end 2002. It’s hard to believe that consumption will be vigorous in such an environment.

The problem with shrinking net worth is that debt loads don’t shrink along with them. In a recent interview, elliottwave.com’s Bob Prechter summed upon the debt situation thusly: ”During that third wave, from 1942 to 1966, consumer debt was only 64% of annual disposable personal income on average. At the end of the fifth wave in the year 2000, it was 97%, and as you point out, right now, it’s over 100%. So debt is greater than annual disposable income. We had total credit market debt at 150% of GDP back in the third wave. It’s 300% today.”

Debt is a drag.

The problem with shrinking net worth is that debt loads don’t shrink along with them.

This is the essence of the horrors of deflation. As more current assets are devalued (result of deflation) to the new, lowered dollar value, the long-term debt is still at the old, pre-deflation dollar levels. More valuable dollars paying off less valuable denominated debt. This is the fear in the real-estate market as this is the only asset left that hasn't devalued due to it's extremely long contract lengths.

I can't give you a source right now, but these numbers are nowhere close to what I have seen. Basically, consumer debt to household equity was slightly higher in the 1990s than the 1980s. SLIGHTLY. You can jimmy the figures however you want to arrive at the ABSURD "300%" stat, but you know that simply defies reality. Americans do not owe THREE TIMES what they own.

This MIGHT mean 300% debt to INCOME (and I think that is high). But what has happened in the last 30 years is that "forced" savings of all sorts, along with government subsidized home ownership, has soared. Think about company pension plans, social security, health insurance (which is a form of income): Like it or not, all of these are "assets," along with life insurance, the home, and outside-the-company savings. As I say, the 300% number is nowhere close---not in the same UNIVERSE---as the numbers other economists have come up with.