SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: John Pitera who wrote (3947)5/31/2001 12:14:26 AM
From: John Madarasz  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 33421
 
John... This is an interesting argument Moskow makes.

I believe Bill Gross's latest essay shoots a lot of holes in the productivity myth being able to sustain and stimulate the market going forward however... at least in the near/forseeable future.

...Shiller’s chart would suggest as much, but there is additional theoretical smoke here to be concerned with. The following chart, advanced by Secular Forum guest speaker Stephen Roach, who along with Northwestern’s Robert Gordon ranks at the top of the world’s productivity experts, shows a pronounced disparity between what is known as “labor” and “total factor productivity” or TFP....

pimco.com

It’s the labor productivity that markets and corporations have been focused on, and that productivity measure has indeed accelerated in recent years, rising at a faster rate than at any time since the 1960s. But TFP, which includes not only labor but plant and equipment, has barely produced a ripple – in fact, it has gone down over the past few years. That means that labor productivity is up and corporate profits are up because of “capital deepening” (the amount of capital employed per worker) – not necessarily higher total factor productivity (the efficiency with which both capital and labor are used). It means that Americans have invested in more machines but not necessarily ones that are any more productive than during the past 130 years – to cite Shiller’s example again.

So? Why don’t we just keep on buying more machines? We will, but not as many, and that makes all the difference. Because prior levels of investment have been made possible via increasing amounts of debt as well as IPO, venture capital, and other equity financing which now is much harder to come by, the ability of corporate America to “deepen” capital at anywhere close to recent levels is more than suspect. This link of the New Age Economy’s chain falls under the category of “all good things must end” or at least slow down. Productivity’s recent downturn, based upon serious disruptions in business investment has begun to influence the economy and investment markets alike, suggesting that the peak has been seen, even if the end is not near.

But is it a cyclical or a secular peak you imbecile? Good question, Anne. Because if the Fed can pump up the economy with its 250 basis points of cheaper money, then why not party-hearty for another 10 years. Maybe, but not likely. With private consumer and corporate debt at historically high levels and with investors finally believing that stocks are not just a one-way winning lottery ticket, the next cycle is almost certain to be less exuberant than the last. And there is after all not only business investment but consumer spending that must slow down.



To: John Pitera who wrote (3947)5/31/2001 9:56:45 AM
From: MulhollandDrive  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 33421
 
Hi John,

Thanks for your explanation. I suppose my misunderstanding of his comments apparently come from my incorrect assumptions about productivity. Certainly not to say productivity is irrelevant in a weakening economy, just pondering how much it actually ameliorates the demand side of the equation. I'm not quite sure at this point what to think of wage push in light of the recent job losses.

>>if we Parse Fed Gov. Moskow's words, he
seems to be saying that the preeminent concern is economic
weakness, and the overhand of inventory, and overinvestment
in Technology capital expediture is the main problem



To: John Pitera who wrote (3947)5/31/2001 10:29:21 AM
From: John Pitera  Respond to of 33421
 
Note: a post that I also wanted over here........ I also believe that we'll see a shift in asset classes out of paper assets and into harder assets, such as Commodities, Real Estate, Precious Metals etc.

These moves are like tectonic plate shifts so it takes quite a while for them to develop and mature. One of
the trickier aspects of the next year is that most assets may go down in price, thus prompting even greater
monetary stimulus, which will be so Powerful that it will get the Reinflation Leg of the Macro cycle or K Wave
going. AJ Frost and Prechter's book written in the late 1970's was looking for the bottom of the K-Wave in 2002
or 2003, and I know of several others who are considering a low in this time window. Most Asset classes
will have a tough time appreciating much until we reach bottom.

One can even speculate that this is why the US Dollar has been so very strong and is back to the highest
level in 15 years. It's reflecting the relative underperformance of holding other assets classes, currencies etc.

One would expect "Cash in the Mattress" to be the best place for one's money at the nadir of the K-Wave,
much as it was in July of 1932.

John