Monday, November 30, 2009

Hysteria and Economic Blogs: Why They're Best Friends

Reading blogs that in any way write about economics has generally become an exercise in utter futility. According to most good news is either propagated by corporate whores who are blind to the realities around them or presented without considering "all" the facts. All government statistics and all economists are wrong -- unless they support or present a bearish viewpoint. Then the facts are treated as irrefutable truths presented by intellectual gods. And Goldman Sachs or the Federal Reserve manipulated everything to further some plot. In other words, ridiculous conspiracy theories are far more common than simple factually based analysis. How did things get so out of line?

There are several reasons. The first and most obvious is, "if it bleeds it leads." This is a saying from the days when newspapers were the predominant form of presenting and communicating information. Bloody pictures and sensationalistic headlines simply sold more newspapers. Translate that to the blogsphere and proclamations that the economy is going to hell will probably attract more readers. For reasons that I still don't understand, train wrecks are fun to watch. I'm reminded here of the album by Megadeath titled Peace Sells ... But Who's Buying?

Then there is the issue that many people in the blogsphere were right about the economy. Over the last three or so years, the only people who issued any warnings about the US' economic trajectory were blogs. At first they were the lunatic fringe, the voice in the wilderness. But after the crash happened more people tuned into blogs to get their financial information. Readership increased. But as the facts changed -- as we saw economic indicators start to bottom and then turn positive -- blogs did not change their opinions. The reasons here are two fold. First, many people made a name for themselves by being bearish. Changing their perception would mean giving up the quality that made them famous in the first place and thereby threaten their readership. The second is many people have a preconceived perspective -- that is, some people are fundamentally bearish regardless of the economic environment. Just as importantly, there are some who want things to be bad in order to create an environment where fundamental change is more likely. In other words, these people have a clear political agenda; they simply use economics to accomplish these ends. There is nothing wrong with this. But their bias should be understood and clearly made.

Third, there is the simple fact that people who write about the economy don't understand the economy. Here is a classic example. The unemployment rate is a lagging economic indicator. This means it goes down after the economy starts growing. The intuitive reason for this is simple. During a recession businesses cut production and lay people off. As the economy starts to grow, businesses first increase production and the hours that their existing work force works. Then, as demand picks up more and more, businesses start to hire again. However, reading the economic blogsphere it becomes very obvious that people writing about the economy don't know about this relationship. I'd love to tell you that unemployment will suddenly drop to 5% next quarter. But that's just not going to happen because that's not the way the economy works. Certain things happen at certain times in economic cycles.

And finally there are the conspiracy theories floating around the Internet. According to some the entire crash was orchestrated by Goldman Sachs. According to others, the Federal Reserve is part of a secret plot to do ... something. The reality is the economic meltdown was caused by numerous, inter-related events coming together in what is literally a once-in-a-lifetime perfect economic storm. It's going to take a long time to sort through the mess to figure out what went wrong and how all of those pieces fit together. In difficult times it's easy to scapegoat parties and institutions. The reality is it's a lot more complicated.

So, here's the reality of where we are. The economy is back from the brink; we're no longer falling off a cliff. Last quarter the economy grew by 2.8%. Yes, that was the result of the stimulus -- which is exactly what is supposed to happen at the end of a recession. However, we have a lot of work to do. The unemployment rate is still over 10.2%. Unemployment benefits must be increased and extended. And plans to get the unemployment rate down should be initiated.

4 comments:

Dragonchild said...

Also keep in mind this is the worst recession in three generations. So, for many middle-class workers who never tasted true adversity, this is a life-changing experience. It's something they never prepared for because they never had to. In fact, that's probably why things got so bad in the first place.

Things are starting to turn around, but for those who are just coming to terms with a vastly reduced economic status, good news isn't really good news. Like the wolf in Aesop's fable or the guy who can't get a date arbitrarily decides all women are trouble, people who experience misfortune and see the uphill climb before them don't want to believe it's possible for anyone to do better. It's so much easier to believe they're just cursed "like everyone else". When you take away the "like everyone else", well. . . that's like ripping away a security blanket.

Todd said...

whoa - a Megadeth reference in a financial blog? You have a fan for life!

Anonymous said...

I'm just a blue collar working guy (subspecies: equities swing trader, sub-sub species blog lurker) trying to make sense of it all, as best I can. I agree with most of what you've said but must quibble.

lots of voices, not just blogs warned us. eg. Steven Roach, Peter Schiff, more.

"once in a lifetime perfect storm" is inappropriate and unwise as it leaves room for the "whocouldanode crowd" to duck accountability by using the "black swan" meme.

artificially cheap money, absent or ignored risk controls, excessive leverage, speculative frenzies. calamity was as assured as anything in this life can be.

I can't dismiss the "apocalypse soon" bloggers yet because of 2 things.

1) the leverage is still there, concentrated in fewer hands. the impaired assets are still there.

2)no serious effort being made to structurally reform the financial system, + Bookstaber's "tightly coupled systems" idea + unprecedented governmental reflation efforts make it easy to posit another disaster coming, on an even larger scale. sovereign defaults, protectionism, trade wars, further trade collapse, actual wars, bond market dislocation, disorderly currency moves, etc.


household debt/GDP ratio is very ominous to anyone calling recovery.

Sure, Denninger is a kook most of the time, and hellasious at Sudden Debt wants to replace the $ with a green/carbon based currency, and the goldbugs are predicting the end of the fiat currency denominated world as we know it, but..

I feel as though the problems are so fundamentally extreme that the most fundamental assumptions we've been operating on need to be re-examined, and these guys are trying. they talk their book, they fearmonger to serve their personal, political, ideological agendas, but as a guy whose inflation adjusted wage has declined by 24% or so in last 18 years, I'm wondering if the particular capitalistic system we have, is the best we can do. Everything I have is based on economic decisions I made in the 1980's and early '90s. home equity, employment decision, investments. Since 2000, all my best investment decisions have been market timing decisions to 'get out', not invest more, or reallocate, or diversify. I look around at others around me, supporting a family with 3-4 jobs between husband and wife, and barely making it. I see the people in the grocery store paying with food stamps. the REO For Sale signs and the NOD's on the doorsteps in my neighborhood, and I wonder, if this is the destiny of capitalism. poverty and socialism. the one for ordinary folks, the other for the connected and prosperous.
corruption and malfeasance eat at the very heart of faith in democracy and capitalism, so I'll keep reading Yves Smith and others.
a system where profits rise much greater than ordinary incomes, and large scale capital allocations don't serve the public interest increases disaffection with the system, so I'll keep reading Sudden Debt, Angry Bear and others.
fraudulent underwriting, off-balance sheet accounting games, debt of all kinds compounding faster than GDP sap faith in the system, as well as the system itself so I will even keep on reading Denninger and Zero Hedge.

I trade the tape I see, but the tape for the American consumer looks structurally bearish to me.

It feels like 1931.

thanks for your contributions, I've recommended you to people I know who're interested in the blog world's view of things, as well as some of the others to whom I've referred.

brodero said...

Household debt service payments plus Government debt service payments Minus Personal Savings is
at its best level in 14 years (1995).