Where should I put my money? - 3-Mar-07 - Generational Dynamics

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 3-Mar-07

Where should I put my money?

Answers to financial questions from readers.

I've been receiving a lot of financial questions from concerned readers lately. Some of these questions would require an operational crystal ball to answer, and others can be probabilistically answered, based on trends identified by Generational Dynamics forecasting.

I have always been very reluctant to give financial advice, and that's still true today, but I'll try to say as much as I can.

Almost every journalist, pundit, analyst, and advisor has some financial stake in today's market, and their answers to financial advice questions are influenced by what is most likely to make money for them. I have nothing at stake except my own credibility, so my answers will be a lot more cautious than answers by others.

This article is meant to be comprehensive, so it will repeat material I've given in other articles. In particular, I want to give the theoretical explanation of what things can and cannot be predicted, so that readers can draw their own conclusions about the validity of the predictions.

Q:
You've been saying for years that "the stock market will fall to the Dow 3000-4000 range, probably in the 2006-2007 time frame." If it doesn't happen in 2007, does that mean you simply move the time frame to 2008? Is it ever possible for you to be wrong?

A:
There's no way to predict the date of a generational panic. If I knew of a way, then I'd be wealthy, instead of being an unemployed senior IT consultant who is just getting by.
I'm very, very aware of the problem you mention, so what I do instead is point to imbalances that can't continue. In my article, "System Dynamics and the Failure of Macroeconomics Theory," I show that macroeconomic theory doesn't get anything right, and so at least I'm no worse than mainstream macroeconomics (though admittedly that isn't a very high bar). But more important, I've pointed out that mainstream macroeconomics predicts that various things should be leveling off and falling - public debt, balance of payments, etc. -- but they keep growing exponentially. With hedge funds, I've shown that the global economy has turned into a giant pyramid scheme (or Ponzi scheme) -- and you can't predict when a pyramid scheme will crash either, but you know for sure that it has to crash.
So I use the terminology "it could happen next week, next month, next year, or thereafter, but probably sooner rather than later," to convey a sense of urgency without committing to a date.
But the point is that the imbalances cannot continue. It's mathematically impossible.
So that's the best I can do for a date, until I can find someone who can repair my fortune telling globe.
So my answer to the complaint that my forecast can never be proven wrong is as follows: If public debt and global account balances and hedge fund market values actually start falling, instead of growing exponentially as they've been doing for years, then you can declare me "wrong."

Q:
While your comments regarding the stock market are very interesting I miss any remarks about currency issues. Will we get deflation or inflation? Will gold rise? Will the dollar do better or worse than the yen? Isn't the real bubble in emerging markets?

A:
Normally I can't make any such specific predictions, because that's not what Generational Dynamics is all about.
The comparison to weather forecasting is as follows: A weatherman will see that the barometer is falling, and from the thermometer that the temperature is freezing, and conclude that it's probably going to snow.
The predictions that I make are of a different kind: No matter what the thermometer or the barometer say today, the weather is going to get warmer over the next few months because summer's coming. Simple, huh?
In other words, Generational Dynamics identifies trends that are decades or even centuries long and applies them to today. The methodology for making the resulting forecasts is what I've been working on for five years. My web site has been an open experiment since 2003: every article I've written, every prediction I've made is still on the web site, where anyone can go back and read it to make sure that I'm not fudging.
Of the variables you've mentioned above, I believe the only one that I've commented on is the inflation rate, where I've said that we're in a long-range deflationary trend, and that I expect prices to fall 30% by 2010.
However, relative currency values over the next two decades will probably depend on who wins the war.
From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, I can't narrow things down too much. Generational Dynamics predictions are based on the attitudes and behaviors of large masses of people, entire generations of a population.
Every individual has free will. The attitudes and behaviors of one person or a small group of people, including a group of politicians, cannot be predicted.
However, entire generations of people act in predictable and cyclical manners, and the attitudes and behaviors of entire generations of people can be predicted, in some cases rather precisely.
So the "real bubble" is not one particular market or one particular asset. The "real bubble" is that entire generations of people alive today have lost all semblance of risk aversion, and they'll use whatever tools are available -- Wall Street, emerging markets, hedge funds, whatever -- to exhibit this wild, debauched, unprincipled financial behavior.
When you ask whether the "real bubble" is in emerging markets or Wall Street, you're asking about the tools the investors are using, not about the generational attitudes and behavior. And there's no way to predict what tools will be used, except that if a tool is available, it will be used.

Q:
How come financial analysts on television can make specific forecasts?

A:
As I said, they're like weather forecasters. They can tell you whether it will rain tomorrow, but they can't tell you whether it will rain next week. These are short-term forecasts.
Let me give an example from Friday on CNBC. Host commentator Larry Kudlow was arguing with several people -- consultant Steve Liesman, and guest Nouriel Roubini -- about whether the economy is going into a recession.
Now, there are several so-called "economists" who make predictions based on political inclinations. Two of the worst miscreants in this regard are Larry Kudlow, who is biased to the right, and Paul Krugman, who is consistently to the left. It was amusing to see Kudlow criticize pro-Democratic anti-Bush Krugman on Friday for predicting nine recessions in the last four years, while the pro-Republican pro-Bush Kudlow invariably predicts that things are always going to do well. These are all political forecasts, and they're worse than useless.
Now, in his discussions with the other economists, Kudlow wanted to make the point that there are many indicators that we're headed for a boom economy, and few indicators that we're headed for a bust.
Without attempting to comment on them, here's his list of the indicators that we're headed for a boom economy: JoC [Journal of Commerce] Industrial Metals Index, CRB [Commodity Research Bureau] Futures Index, CRB Spot Index, Dollar Index, Yen Carry Trade, Emerging Markets Spread, OFHEO [Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight] Home Price Index, ISM [Institute for Supply Management] Manufacturing Index, Junk Spread/Baa Spread, Profits/Profit Margins, Low Unemployment/High Wages, Record Low Margin Tax.
And here's his much shorter list of "bust" indicators: Gold, Copper, Yield Curve Spread, 10-Year Yield. (Why isn't the housing bubble bust on this list? I don't know.)
The point I want to make is that it's ALWAYS possible to prepare two lists like this. Even in the depths of the Great Depression, I'm sure that there were some indicators of a "boom."
So all the economists end up doing is choosing their favorite short-term indicators and talking about them. Someone on the other side of the issue chooses from his opposing list of indicators.
That's why these economists can make specific predictions, and that's why their predictions have no better probability than chance of being right.
The analogy to weather forecasting is this: They see that the outside temperature was in the 40s last week, and is in the 30s this week, and so they predict that the temperature will be in the 20s next week. (This analogy is a very accurate one, incidentally.) They use short-term indicators, and completely ignore the long-term trend that indicates that summer is coming.
Generational Dynamics predictions are not like that. (Recall the weather forecasting analogy -- predicting that it's going to be hot this summer). That's why Generational Dynamics predictions are always right, even though the time frame cannot be predicted with certainty.
However, the forecasting methodology that I've been developing these last five years does use current economic indicators, but in a different way than the pundits. Generational Dynamics long-term forecasting alone tells me the final destination, but not what route we'll take or the timeline indicating how long it will take.
The full forecasting methodology combines the long-term predictions, giving us the destinations, with short-term economic indicators and events, to identify the route and the timeline. This is what I've been developing all these years, and everything I've done is posted on this web site (or, in the case of more theoretical matters, in the "Objections to Generational Dynamics" thread of the Fourth Turning forum).
The weather forecasting analogy is this: We know that summer is coming, but we're not sure when. So we look at the thermometer and the temperature trends, and we use that information to determine how close we are to summer. This is a very different way of using the thermometer than the pundits do.
Incidentally, I've used the same forecasting technique in politics as well. For example, in the Israel/Palestine region, the May, 2003, Generational Dynamics prediction was that Arafat's disappearance would be part of a generational change that would lead the Mideast into a massive new crisis war (between Jews and Arabs), re-fighting the bloodbath war in 1948-49 following the partitioning of Palestine and the creation of the state of Israel. Since then, I've been tracking events to correlate them with the Generational Dynamics prediction, in order to narrow the time frame and determine the scenarios.

Q:
Perhaps you can make some forecasts based on long-term trends.
The value of the U.S. dollar went up in the 1930s Great Depression. Will that happen again in a new Great Depression?
How will it do against the yen and the euro?

A:
It's impossible to predict. Remember that the U.S. was enormously a creditor nation in 1929 and throughout the 1930s, while today we're enormously a debtor nation.
Many economists today believe that the yen is substantially undervalued, so it might end up doing the best. I suspect that there is a lot of merit to this claim, but this is not an issue I've studied.
The euro looks strong today, but it has very weak fundamentals because its continued existence depends on agreement and support by many euroland countries, and the EU countries are bitterly divided over the EU constitution. After all these years, Britain still uses a national currency instead of the euro. When a real financial crisis arrives, it's quite possible that several euroland countries will drop the euro and return to their national currencies. In fact, Morgan Stanley warned about exactly that in 2004.

Q:
If the market is going to fall, should I sell short?

A:
For those who don't know, "selling short" is a technical method for betting that a particular stock, or the stock market as a whole, is going to fall. In its simplest form, it works like this: You borrow some shares of stock, and you sell them at the current price. Three months later, you're required to buy the same number of shares at the price at that time, so you can repay the stock loan. If the price has gone down in the meantime, then you've made money.
In the current market, there are two big problems with selling short:

Perhaps the market will recover from last week's havoc, and the stock market bubble will grow even larger for a few months. Then you would lose a great deal of money in the meantime.

When the actual generational panic occurs, and the stock market starts falling for real, then most investors will be unable to meet their obligations. Since someone else will be holding your money in escrow during the period before you return the stock, you may end up losing your entire investment anyway.

Even in the best of times, selling short should be attempted only by investors who REALLY know what they're doing.

Q:
What should I buy when I sell my stocks? Should I buy gold?

A:
The price of gold will depend on so many chaotic factors that it's impossible to predict what will happen. In the case of a major financial crisis, when factories are closing, the value of gold may go down along with other commodities.
On the other hand, if the Clash of Civilizations World War begins, then the value of gold will probably spike up, at least for a while.
But then there's the other problem: If you have gold in a crisis, what will you do with it? You can't eat it, so you have to exchange it for cash or food, and that may be a problem. It's even possible in some scenarios that the government will confiscate all gold, so your gold would be useless.

Q:
I buy and sell stocks on my desktop computer. Suppose I keep my money invested, but sell everything the moment that things look really bad. I can do it right away at any time, since I'm always at my computer.

A:
There are two things wrong with this strategy.
First, you won't necessarily follow through. This kind of day trading is a gambling addiction, and you won't want to sell out so easily. You may decide to wait a little longer to see if the market goes up again, and then you'll lose even more.
Second, you won't be able to sell. When a generational panic occurs, as in 1929, the computer systems of every bank, broker and exchange will be overwhelmed with sell orders. It's likely that the markets will have to shut down for a few hours, or for a day or two. So the market will keep falling, and you'll be stuck using your desktop computer to run a spreadsheet computing how much money you're losing every minute.

Q:

What's the "Principle of Maximum Ruin"?

A:
The Principle of Maximum Ruin is my name for a phenomenon that economist John Kenneth Galbraith described in his 1954 book The Great Crash - 1929, summarized in the following passage:

"A common feature of all these earlier troubles [previous panics] was that having happened they were over. The worst was reasonably recognizable as such. The singular feature of the great crash of 1929 was that the worst continued to worsen. What looked one day like the end proved on the next day to have been only the beginning. Nothing could have been more ingeniously designed to maximize the suffering, and also to insure that as few as possible escaped the common misfortune." (p. 108)

In other words, all the experts were fooled, because nothing like it had happened in their lifetimes. That's Generational Dynamics in action.
Galbraith showed how, after the initial crash on October 24, 1929, "In the first week the slaughter had been of the innocents," in the second week it was "the well-to-do and the wealthy" who were slaughtered (p. 113), and then more and more people were sucked into ruin during the years that followed. Maximum ruin for the maximum number of people.
This process has already begun again, and today it's in full swing.

Q:
What are "cant" and "incantation"?

A:
These are the words used by Galbraith in the book just referenced to describe how government officials and financiers believe that they can keep the economy sound.
Almost all commentators have an enormous bias: They MUST predict an improving economy if they want to keep their jobs. A stockbroker, a pundit, a journalist, a politician will lose his job or be shunned if he predicts a financial crisis, or even a recession. This was clear in the past week from the harsh condemnations of Alan Greenspan, whose remarks saying that a recession was a possibility could hardly be arguable.
Galbraith gave dozens of examples of this. His point was quite similar to mine: That the commentators and analysts don't have the vaguest idea what they're talking about.
Here's what he wrote about the comments of the great financier Andrew W. Mellon:

"In any case, ... reassurance came from still higher authority. Andrew W. Mellon said, "There is no cause for worry. The high tide of prosperity will continue."
Mr. Mellon did not know. Neither did any of the other public figures who then, as since, made similar statements. These are not forecasts; it is not to be supposed that the men who make them are privileged to look farther into the future than the rest. Mr. Mellon was participating in a ritual which, in our society, is thought to be of great value for influencing the course of the business cycle. By affirming solemnly that prosperity will continue, it is believed, one can help insure that prosperity will in fact continue. Especially among businessmen the faith in the efficiency of such incantation is very great." (p. 15-16)

Galbraith uses the words "cant" or "incantation" to describe what's going on.
The dictionary defines "cant" as: "insincere, esp. conventional expressions of enthusiasm for high ideals, goodness, or piety."
The dictionary defines "incantation" as either "the chanting or uttering of words purporting to have magical power," or "repetitious wordiness used to conceal a lack of content; obfuscation."
This exactly describes the situation.
Long-time readers of this web site may recall from 2004 how shocked I was that Bernanke congratulated the Fed's jawboning policy for improving the economy. In other words, as incredible as it seems, he believes that the viability of the economy depends on what he and the Fed governors SAY. Fundamentals make no difference at all. Reading it, I couldn't believe my eyes.
And, as I've said in previous articles, that's the piece that's really crazy about today's leading "experts." No one asks, "What is the REAL value of the stock market?" because the only possible answer to that question is around Dow 4500-5000. And so, the "experts" don't think about that, but simply worry about what people say, as if that's all that matters.
There's almost no common sense; just cant and incantation. And cant and incantation are very important factors in the Principle of Maximum Ruin.

Q:
What is "volatility," and why does high volatility indicate that a panic may be near?

A:
Officially, the VIX is the "Volatility Index," computed by the Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE).
Intuitively, volatility means that the stock market as a whole is making wild swings up and down. This occurred earlier this week, on Tuesday, when the market swung through a range of over 500 (Dow) points. By Friday, the volatility had gone down, and Friday was a fairly quiet day.
In "normal times," investors make buy/sell decisions by examining individual stocks. When investors take individual paths, betting on individual stocks, then one investor's gains are canceled out by another investor's losses, so the market as a whole remains steady, and volatility is very low.
But when volatility spikes up, it means that investors are now betting on the market as a whole, rather than on individual stocks. It's a state of frantic, high anxiety, because investors are panicking, for fear that the entire market will fall further, and they'll lose money, or that the entire market will go upward, and they'll lose the opportunity to make money.
When investors get into this state, they're essentially treating the entire market as a single stock, and they either buy the market or sell the market.
Now, the point is that, even in normal times, an individual stock is much more volatile than the market as a whole. A scandal could force an individual stock to fall 50%, or an unexpected merger rumor could double the stock value.
When investors are so frantic that they treat the entire market as a single stock, then the stock market as a whole can become extremely volatile, subject to any bit of news or commentary. That's when the volatility is high.
So it becomes a cycle. Bad news makes the investors anxious. Anxious investors sell off, and the selloff becomes more bad news that makes investors even more anxious. Under the right conditions, the anxiety reaches a tipping point and turns into full-scale panic.
Those are very dangerous times. Just as an individual stock could fall 25% in a day or two, when investors treat the whole stock market as if it were an individual stock, then the whole stock market could fall 25% in a day or two, as happened in 1929 and 1987.

Q:
Can you say anything at all? Where should I put my money?

A:
There are a few things that I've told people to do. These are forecasts I can make because of long term trends.
For most people, the best bet is to keep your money in cash in a local bank you can get to quickly, or else stick it in your mattress.
Another alternative is to put your money into short-term 6-month Treasury bonds. You can purchase them online for no commission from http://treasurydirect.gov . They're almost entirely risk-free, and pay around 5% interest. However, keep some cash around, since you may not have any internet access during a crisis.

Q:
What about long-term Treasury bonds, 10 year or 30 year?

A:
I've had arguments with people over this.
There are more than two trillion dollars of these long-term bonds sitting in central bank vaults around the world, especially in Japan, China and the UK. Furthermore, this amount continues to grow exponentially. As a result, "everybody" knows the U.S. Treasury will never be able to redeem all those bonds.
People tell me, "Of course they'll all be redeemed. The Treasury can print as much money as it wants, and it could redeem them all tomorrow."
But my intuition tells me that when the world is flooded with some trillions of some particular item, and that the number of trillions keeps growing exponentially, and that those trillions of items could go on the market at any time, then those items may turn out not to be very valuable.
During a crisis or a war, China or another country may put several hundred billion dollars worth of these long-term bonds on the market in order to destabilize the American economy. At that point, if you happen to have some of these bonds, they'll be worthless.
So, if you're going to buy Treasury bonds at all, the best bet is probably short-term, 6-month Treasury bonds.

Q:
What's a "generational panic"?

A:
If you go back through history, there are of course many small or regional recessions. But since the 1600s there have been only five major international financial crises: Tulipomania bubble (1637), South Sea Bubble (1721), French Monarchy bankruptcy (1789), Hamburg Crisis of 1857 (or Panic of 1857), and 1929 Wall Street crash.
Each of these major international crises occurred roughly 70-80 years after the previous one. What you find is that each new "debt bubble" occurs at exactly the time that the generation of people who grew up during the previous financial crisis all disappear (retire or die), all at once. Thus, the length of time between these "generational" financial crises is approximately equal to the length of a maximum human lifetime.
Our 70-80 year interval is pretty much over. The next major 1930s style Great Depression is just around the corner, with 100% certainty. Nothing can be done to stop it. All we can do is prepare for it.
As we've been saying since 2002, it's possible to prove that a major 1930s style Great Depression is coming, simply by noting that the stock market is overpriced by a factor of over 200%. Price/earnings ratios have now averaged 20 or more since 1995, and this alone shows that a crash is coming, since P/E ratios always fall close to 5 every decade or two, the last time in 1982.
Today, you can look at various variables -- public debt, trade balances, hedge fund market -- and note that these variables have been growing exponentially, with no sign of leveling off and falling, and no willingness in Central Banks to force them to level off and fall. You can show mathematically that this situation cannot continue.
So it's easy to prove that we're close to a major financial crisis, but it's impossible to know exactly when. When it happens, it will be triggered by a generational panic, the first since 1929. It will be a massive loss of confidence throughout the country and the world, total destruction of self-confidence, replaced by a corrosively growing fear, leading to panic, massive homelessness and bankruptcies. We're actually overdue for that, just as we're overdue for a flu pandemic.
It's impossible to predict when this panic will occur, or what will trigger it. There have been some times in the last couple of years when I've warned my readers to be especially cautious, since the markets seemed particularly nervous. This was especially true following the LiveDoor collapse a year ago, and again in May, when synchronized markets around the world fluctuated wildly. However, investors have always returned to their previous levels of starry-eyed giddiness, pushing the market bubbles even higher.
Right now, and for the next few months, is another time of extreme danger. It is the wrong time to be in the stock market.

Q:
So where should I put my money?

A:
I never did answer that question, did I? The truth is that we're headed for a time of financial crisis and war that few people alive today have ever seen before. The last time was the 1930s and early 1940s, and the time before that was the late 1850s and early 1860s.
At times like this, there's no guarantee of anything. You have to look at the options available to you, and find what looks best in your situation. Try to remain flexible, and be prepared for anything.
Treasure the time you have left, and use the time to prepare yourself, your family, your community and your nation.

Web site readership has been greatly increasing in the last couple of months. I thank all of you for continuing to come back, and I appreciate the opportunity to present the information on this web site as a public service.

I'm still managing to keep up with all e-mail questions sent to me, though it sometimes takes a few days for me to get back with a response, depending on volume of e-mail. So if you have a question, by all means send me an e-mail message, or use the "Comment" link at the top of this page.

If you want to have a more open debate, you can do so in the "Objections to Generational Dynamics" thread of the Fourth Turning forum. That thread tends to get somewhat theoretical and esoteric sometimes (when there isn't a flame war going on), but it's still a good place to ask any kind of question on this subject that interests you. (3-Mar-07) Permanent Link
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Donate to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

	Generational Dynamics
	Forecasting America's Destiny ... and the World's

\| HOME \| WEB LOG \| COUNTRY WIKI \| COMMENT \| FORUM \| DOWNLOADS \| ABOUT \|

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 3-Mar-07 Where should I put my money?

Web Log Pages

Generational Dynamics Web Log for 3-Mar-07
Where should I put my money?