Stagflation and the Limits of Growth 14 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Is there anyone left who doesn’t expect (and fear) a world-wide economic downturn? Maybe I’m too close to my old profession as a dismal scientist. Perhaps I’m obsessive about economic concerns, but I can’t find any optimism among those who tend to matters of international growth. Regardless of where you look, there are clouds either overhead, as in the U.S., or on the horizon and blowing towards shore, as in Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The old giants are staggering, and the new ones will be soon!
The table below (click to enlarge), taken from Bloomberg, is a little outdated in what to expect in terms of real growth, but it is the latest available. In my view, and increasingly that of many others, real GDP growth in the U.S. and probably Europe will decline for 2008, and not be much better in 2009. Stagflation will not be a purely local affair for us.
Of course, there is no agreement about the severity or longevity of the downturn. There never is. But slower times are upon us, and the greater fear is that it could turn into a 1930s scenario of economic activity spiraling downward. This scenario unfolds like this: to protect themselves, the developed nations (the U.S. and Euroland, e.g.) will blame everyone else and begin pulling back from their bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. This they will do, trying to protect their domestic workforce from falling real wages and businesses from the effects of higher commodity prices. This, in turn, would be met by retaliation of our former partners in the developing world, in the form of trade embargoes, higher tariffs and inflated currencies. World trade plummets, and the heady times of ever expanding world economies comes to an end. It’s a horror of a scenario, and it did happen in the early stages of the 1930s depression.
Personally, I don’t think this will happen now, at least not to the worst extent. But, I do believe that this scenario will unfold in a modified form. We are already seeing embargoes of food commodities. Many of the rice producing nations in Asia are already prohibiting exports. Argentine farmers are trying to mobilize an embargo of their grain crops in order to lower domestic prices.
From our side, there is already talk of modifying NAFTA, hoping to scotch the flow of jobs to south of the border. It won’t work, of course. Muscle jobs are not coming back to America. But, our southern neighbors make tempting targets for demigods looking for a way to exploit our troubles for their benefit.
Fortunately, it doesn’t have to unfold in this way. The rapid expansion of the emerging nations has undoubtedly fueled the increases in prices for world commodities. And, in the short run world production of most of the commodities cannot be dramatically expanded. Prices did and will go up. But, over a longer time, additional production will brought on line. Already, in the U.S., farmers in the Midwest are planting new crops on land that has been fallow for decades. More oil will be found, and energy substitutes will be developed. All over the world there will be increases in production of foods and commodities.
On the demand side of the equation, adjustments will also be made that help lessen the blow. Americans and Europeans will learn to be more efficient with their petroleum products. We will develop more efficient cars; we will use cars less and public transportation more; we will move closer to work and take fewer driving vacations and unnecessary trips. Given some time, we will lower our use of the petroleum and help moderate the escalation of prices that has driven our real income down.
In the developing world, the same adjustments will be made. They will lower their production of manufactured goods (and the demand for the commodities used to make them), as the effects of the slowdown reach their factories. They will suffer from higher prices, just as we have, and their real incomes will fall some in the adjustment, just as ours has. China and other nations that are now subsidizing low petroleum prices will change, and bring market forces to their side, thus helping reduce demand for petroleum products.
In the end, the growth rate of the world’s economies will resume, but they will resume at levels more sustainable in both the developed and emerging markets. It was too much to expect that every nation could become rich overnight. The resources of the world are too constrained to allow for that—and that’s what we are bumping up against now. But, incomes around the world can rise as we accommodate the new demand and higher prices. It’s the old economic story: resources are limited, and the price system allocates them to the most efficient use. There are limits to growth in every economy, and the usual suspect in limiting it is the availability of raw materials to produce the higher income and the capacity to process it. But, that doesn’t mean that growth isn’t possible. It just means there are constraints. Growth will come back, only at a more moderate and sustainable level.
It will happen again, as it always has. We simply have to allow some time for it to come about, and we can allow for this adjustment not by panicking and setting off a retaliatory round of trade-repression measures.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 14 comments:
But I agree with the implications of flatman and fabian-the pie will grow, but our share will not be as big as it once was. This doesn't have to be such bad news, however. I think the pie wll grow a lot, given the incentives. In that case, a smaller share of a bigger pie may leave us in good shape--depending on how much it grows and how big our share turns out to be.
Best wishes,
Ray
if you can afford it, please visit dubai or abu dhabi. you will get a handle what incentives there are to produce more of what they are already producing. as i see it: 0. they spend money on anything but productive assets.
same applies to the u.s. as it hardly produces anything else but money.
on the other hand china produces so much consumer goods that if they lose their external market they simply have to cut production and lay off 1/2 their workforce. japan does the same with industrial goods.
there is no balance with regards to those countries and if they dont want to exchange depreciating paper for growth and employment there will be no trade. as of now it is mutually beneficial. if there is no trade between them they have to develop somewhat sustainable policies.
do you see americans working real jobs that require skills and knowledge than just filling out paper documents or real estate agents? do you see japanese using their own machinery becuase there they have competitive advantage? do you see the chinese that barely make enough to feed themselves to just play with ipods and plastic toys?
there is accute need for some balance of domestic investment: develop the sectors you are best at, but dont ditch everything else as it is necessary and use the tax system to redistribute wealth so you are not dependent on the mercy of others.
I agree with you that the US has bad fundamentals, I can't possibly go into all the explanations of why. I see a real shift coming in US consumerism that's going to tank a lot of business models based on the "Immediately isn't soon enough," or the "The best isn't good enough," consumer mentalities. The ultra wealthy will always have their toys, but right now is a very bad time to be a mid-range retailer like Kohl's or JC Penney.
I think the real growth will be in alternative energy technologies, but before that can happen there's going to have to be more public pressure on municipalities that caved in to utility companies and enacted policies to limit or ban outright the installation of solar panels and residential windpower.
There's a lot of change on the horizon, and I also think that we're going to see a lot of octopus-like dinosaurs collapse under the weight of their own management infrastructure in the next ten years. I think we're definitely heading for a new "Age of the Entrepreneur." If your rich and lazy today, chances are tomorrow you'll just be lazy.
As many have figured out recently, there is no job creation to cushion the downward spiral. This is deflation we are in, not stagflation although the excess liquidity, market crash and oil shocks do feel a lot like the 1970's (right now, this will get far worse).
Devaluing our dollar as monetary policy is a well documented remedy over hundreds of years (if not thousands going back to Romans who added other metals to there silver and gold coins) to avert public debt defaults. -20 GDP in June of 2007 was calculated, downward over a four year span. Market crash already happened in March, historically real fiscal pain felt 3 years afterward (similar: 1929 crash, 1987 black Tuesday, pain felt in 1933 and 1990). This deflation equations calculated then in June of 2007 was obviously before the massive oil shock which we have just started reeling from.
Depression by 2011 but agree with other posters, we will recover quickly. The gridlock in Washington and bad governments on ruinous fiscal policy paths take time to slow down the momentum and reverse course. Let's hope the fiscal house of cards doesn't collapse completely, but that now depends to me on energy and job creation policy. In-between, much money can be purchasing deflated assets and holding them over a five year span but I suggest waiting until at least December of this year to deploy such a strategy. Have cash on hand, bullion and 30 days food and water supply.
Me and business partner buying a place 50 miles from any major metro in October, first time in my life I was concerned to insulate my families risk in such a physical way. But America will go on. I am staying, much rebuilding will need to be done financially and politically. Very tempting to not leave the country, but this nation is home and some must defend it or we will see an emerging world order dominated by the Middle East and Russia. Not something I want to see...
+ local governments will be in the unique position of increasing home valuations for tax purposes despite drops in real market pricing. certain local governments can only borrow to the extent of a % of real property valuations, so less valuation means less ability to borrow. if local government valuations drop, then the tax rate must proportionally increase to create the same stream of revenues, let alone increase to meet increased program/services costs.
Spend some time reading The Oil Drum:
theoildrum.com
Also, if everyone tries to get rich at the same time, it is the best situation of all because the greater the competition the greater (and faster) the improvement and the greater the prize. Necessity is the mother of invention.
But in China, India and other developing nations, it's an entirely different story. They have resources beyond a single commodity, and they have a histoy of exploiting these advantages. So, I think that the response of the rest of the developing world will be substantially different than that of Arabia.
There is not doubt in my mind that the future will be more competitive that it has been in the past. We must work harder to stay in the same place. But, America has such a great advantge in resources and experience, and in the willingness of its people to put their shoulders to the wheel, that I think we will do well in the competition. While we have been guilty of being lazy and fat, we are much more than that. Just watch and wait. You'll see.
Best wishes,
Ray