Thoughts from the Bunker (September 13, 2011)
Iremain fixated on my theme of “price” before time (i.e., boredom, impatience or some other subjective and self-imposed reason for making a trade for the sake of trading).There are a few things that are working. I have been lightly taking a new position in March 12 LEAPs in GLD over the past week or so. Nothing really worth mentioning. The only reason that I am interested in building a position is because of the possibility that something other than a nuclear plant will blow up over in Europe. The news out of Europe has been thin as of late. Just nothing sufficiently compelling to shake the sense that shining a bright light on the linoleum floor will reveal a ton of cockroaches rambling around the banks holding sovereign debt of nations with little chance of repaying their debt.
Recessions are measured by GDP. A decline in GDP over two consecutive quarters qualifies as a recession. In my view (and I’m sure this won’t surprise those of you who accurately view me as an unapologetic cynic of this type of stuff), GDP isn’t the greatest measure of economic health because of its tie to public spending. The economic models that have been quite consistent in their inaccuracy throughout the years assume a multiplier effect based on government spending. Of course, this assumed multiplier effect has never been proved (and in fact, it is consistently disproved by subsequent economic measures), but it is still relied upon by policy makers in determining how best to use our money. Goolsbee, Summers and Romer — all have left the real world for the comfort of the academic environment — where they can sign autographs and espouse the same theories that wilted under the harsh light of reality. No doubt we’ll be able to purchase their upcoming books on Amazon and thereby make our humble contribution to the growth of the economy.
[By the way, what is rarely discussed is the cost of any multiplier effect on the ultimate rationale for “government stimulus” — job creation! (We KNOW that job creation is the ultimate rationale for government spending because of the recent tendency to substitute “jobs program” for “stimulus spending” when describing identical programs.) We are seeing an endless stream of research reaching the same conclusion — that any jobs created by “stimulus spending” actually cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Give me a few hundred thousand dollars and I’ll hire 10 people to build out SMM and OMM, create a workshop division that teaches regular workshops throughout the nation at reasonable prices…and I’ll make several million — which enables me to promote my new hires with increasing responsibility and increased compensation. True job security from efforts that trickle down through my employees to their families. And the work that they do (and enable me to do) will trickle down to my members in the form of better education and training which enables them to more effectively manage their money and grow their wealth — which is the ultimate financial goal of most people. But this never happens. Instead, we’ll build a billion-dollar mass transit system in San Francisco that employs many, transports few and creates more…um, unfunded pension obligations.]
But even assuming the multiplier effect as billed is accurate (it isn’t), the current move to austerity by many nations (including the US — at least, the rhetoric would have us believe so) will actually have a negative impact on GDP. This is actually a double edged sword. Reductions in public spending will increase the likelihood of a recession. Why? That pesky math again! Subtract government spending from the current GDP and lower GDP. The other edge of the sword is the fallacy of the multiplier effect. I am sure that there is indeed a multiplier effect — but I am not sure whether the actual multiplier is something more than or less than 1.0. Hopefully it is less than 1.0 (in other words, government spending actually hurts the economy because of the crowding out effect where less efficient government spending supersedes more efficient spending by entrepreneurs and private business). In that event, the austerity measures will have LESS of a negative effect that we might otherwise assume.
To tie this up in a bow, here’s the summary. Austerity measures yield a long-term benefit. That’s a given. BUT (and man, this is one big butt) they impose a short-term penalty because a reduction in spending–from whatever source–negatively impacts GDP. And a negative impact on GDP is widely reported. If we get two negative quarters in a row, we are technically back in a recession. That will negatively impact business sentiment and increase the current aversion to hiring by business enterprises. The negative feedback loop — bad news begets poor sentiment and pessimism…which begets the fetal position of business owners (I know that Gary and I are certainly in the fetal position — true story)…which makes them increasingly likely to squeeze more production from current employees rather than hire new ones in an environment where so much uncertainty exists.
And this is why you see corporations awash in cash and with impressive profits (which I believe have peaked and will move lower from here, resulting in lower multiples) because they continue to cut costs (E.g., Bank of America laying off 30,000 people to cut costs) and squeeze more production out of remaining employees without giving them a raise “because the economy is so bad.”
Now, I have my opinions about what “should” be done — but until I run for office [never happen because of too many skeletons in a big closet] or start talking economics with Jared Bernstein [who persistently brings a partisan paper cutter to a gun fight with just about anyone with common sense. But he does have a nice smile and white teeth] you’ll never hear me discuss it other than the occasional comment in this venue.
But I believe that it is safe to assume that the current plans and policies being espoused on BOTH sides of the political aisle will have little positive impact on the current economic situation. The fiscal conservatives propose plans that are likely to yield long term benefits at the expense of short-term stimulus. The fiscal spendthrifts propose plans that simply don’t work (proof: See 2009-2011).
I have no quarrel with the idea of stimulus spending — there is no question in my mind that stimulus spending did make a difference in 2009. But there is also no question that the benefits came at great cost to our progeny. Irrespective of whether MORE stimulus spending (oops, I mean “a new jobs program”) will actually pull us out of the recession that I believe we are still in, the political winds are blowing against a meaningful stimulus. That’s just reality.
So the political cross currents are creating very turbulent waters…causing the macro picture to change on a daily basis. (Stephanie Link’s assertion the other day on CNBC).
My suggestions:
1. Get your own finances in order. Delay the big purchases and instead save money. Let others do the spending to help the GDP. You need to focus on your family.
2. Trade with greater discipline. Focus on singles, not home runs.
3. Be more stock specific — the macro picture changes daily…so the “top down” approach that typically works isn’t really yielding much alpha (outperformance) these days.
4. Learn to grow your trading toolbox. Consider learning to short (it’s not as easy as it might seem because, bull or bear, there is an underlying bid to any market because declining stocks become better values) and use option strategies to skim profits.
5. Watch your outside investments like a hawk. I know many people who have investments in real estate or other business ventures that are now really struggling. They aren’t investments, they are millstones.
6. Any big selloff in gold is an opportunity to buy an appreciating asset on the cheap (the gold bull market is far from over.)
Have a great day!
Dan