Principles of the Stock Market : The Forgotten Man

To Stimulate Or Not To Stimulate The US Economy

Richard Schwartz — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:29:00 GMT

ANTI-Stimulus Protest Demonstrations; Say What?

That’s a big global fear surrounding this global economic slump. History shows economic debacles like this breed unrest, anger, frustration among those losing their jobs, etc. and thus protest demonstrations. If one watches www.worldfocus.com or any other news global news show, you’ll see violent protests happening globally. In Eastern Europe as one example. In China too and especially. China’s government’s big fear, knowing it’s own history, is protests which bring down the government there. Making the upturn in global protests there and elsewhere important for all investors to track.

Yesterday’s Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) newspaper had a front page article reporting that anti-stimulus demonstrations have occurred in 35 American cities. Yes, these are small demonstrations so far, 100 or 200 people and organized by interest groups, but maybe they will grow in size after IBD gave them face time, i.e. publicity -- I hadn’t even heard about these protests at all until yesterday -- and also gave them such a nationalistic and catchy name: “Nationwide Tea Parties.” I read where these events are being organized by those groups who sarcastically say we should: “Legalize Capitalism!” Or who believe: “The best government, governs least.” And those who sardonically and exaggeratedly say: “No to socialism!” And are epitomized by one protestor’s sign which read: “Your mortgage is not my problem!”

Obviously US government stimulus spending to try to keep this weakened economy from getting worse is anathema to those who believe in the strict Austrian school of economics. That economic school says things just get screwed up terribly whenever the government gets involved. And who knows, maybe doing nothing, to try to shorten this downturn, was indeed the right move. But as I see it it’s too late now; we’re already committed. I’ve given up opining on what were the right and wrong roads to follow but let me also report there are a lot of other angry people in America today, those that say they are tired of lavish retreats and concerts, tired of private jets, tried of companies paying out huge bonuses with or without government money. Regular readers know I’ve been angry and pounding the table for many years about these excesses. So maybe we do or will have class warfare, that is if these anti-stimulus demonstrations get larger and cause more of a divide among all kinds of angry Americans.

Schwartz View: But as I see it, we’re now committed to this “bail out” path, we got committed a year ago when we bailed out the first company, Bear Stearns or whoever came first. This far along this path I can’t foresee us stopping now. Plus it only makes common sense for any government to try to stimulate the economy when the two other major sources of normal demand, consumer spending and business investment, are in total hunker down mode. The even bigger picture, as I see things from up on the mountaintop looking down at the valley and what’s happening, is that these demonstrations by those who say your problem is not my problem, are the last desperate efforts by those who still believe in the “me first” path America has been on for roughly three decades now. As I see it, the results of the recent US presidential election announced that the majority of Americans want big change in America, a change which returns the America Dream to the average working person once again and returns us to a more level playing field. And that means, even though there is some opposition, that America has now crossed the Rubicon, so to speak. Meaning we’ve just begun a 10-year or so cycle which puts public interest over private interest. History shows we do swing back and forth from longer periods, or about 20 years, of letting capitalism run unchecked and America showing strong economic growth as a result to shorter periods of about 10 years or so where we put the unfortunate and forgotten Americans first, which yes, also means slower economic growth as a result. (Please read Arthur Schlesinger Jr.’s THE CYCLES OF AMERICAN HISTORY if you’d like more on this repetitive cycle.) All signs that I can detect today tell me that America is going to level the playing field, get rid of the excesses, the corruption and scamming of the system, in general just the overall greed which always naturally arises from allowing capitalism unchecked to run for too darn long. Again, I’m just observing what I see happening not opining whether it’s right or not. As for investment implications, for now stay hunkered down, practice extreme patience and proper money management while out waiting this Papa Bear market.

To subscribe to my daily letter PRINCIPLES OF THE STOCK MARKET or to receive a week’s worth of FREE letters, please email me at RichardStk@oaol.com.

Good trading, speculating and investing!

1930s Parallels Keep Popping Up

Richard Schwartz — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:49:00 GMT

REVIEWING THE 1930s. The Principle of Knowing History. Let me get down on paper a bit about President Hoover (1928 to 1932) and President Roosevelt and the 1930s after nearly finishing up THE FORGOTTEN MAN (2007) by Amity Shlaes. Again, let me recommend you get yourself a copy as today’s happenings keep looking more & more like a redux. I’m still thinking about taking this book to the beach over the Christmas holidays. It’s entertaining reading. One back cover reviewer compared Shlaes to Frederick Lewis Allen and his wonderful early 1900 histories (which I loved and heartily recommend; ‘Only Yesterday,’ ‘Since Yesterday,’ ‘The Big Change’). Shlaes’ history of the Great Depression starts after President Coolidge, a hands off US president gave way to President Hoover, of the same party, who turned out to be much more hands on. This flies in the face of the old belief that Hoover was hands off.

Late 1920s. President Hoover was elected in 1928 and for his first year the economy and stock market was copasetic. But after the October 1929 terrible market crash, it was up to Hoover to decide how to proceed. To understand Hoover, we can go back to when he was Commerce Secretary and wrote a book entitled American Individualism although the name wasn’t appropriate, according to Shlaes: “Hoover rejected the old brand of absolute individualism and distained laissez-faire economics as ‘theoretical and emotional’.” So, when the crisis hit, President Hoover went right to work. First, he made very clear he was for regulation. Hoover believed in government help and loved standards, efficiency and organization and had done much in the middle 1920s to install such across America. But now, upon President Hoover getting a confidential report from the Fed that the market “readjustment” was going to last, and after asking himself a question he later wrote down: “The primary question at once arose as to whether the President and the federal government should undertake to mitigate and to remedy the evils,” Hoover concluded, yes, action was needed. President Hoover from the crash until President Roosevelt took over in March 1933 pushed for “expanded public buildings programs, requested a national system of cooperation among the states on public works programs, proposed expansion of the merchant marine, regulation of the new inter-State electric power system, consolidation of the railroads, development of public health services and departmental reorganization.”

In general terms, Hoover: (1) intervened in business, starting by calling business leaders to Washington and told them to keep up business as usual and to keep wages up, not allowing any free market cleansing, (2) signed one of the largest tariff bills in US history, which caused less trade and thus further contraction and (3) publicly assailed the stock market. All moves which backfired because they also caused a loss of confidence. Retired President Coolidge, the hands off president, railed against Hoover’s moves, calling them “socialistic notions of government.” Right up until President Roosevelt replaced Hoover in early 1933, Hoover continued using the government to try to make things better. In June 1931, for example, Hoover announced a moratorium on German debt repayment. And then created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to help banks and homeowners. Finally Hoover signed a big tax increase, the Revenue Act of 1932, because of his fear an unbalanced budget would cause a run on the dollar. During the interregnum between Roosevelt’s election in November 1932 and his inauguration in March 1933, Hoover even wrote to Roosevelt trying to get him to sign off on special war powers to handle the emergency, and a bank holiday. Roosevelt said no, even though upon taking office, he followed many of Hoover’s beginnings.

March 1933. Upon entering office, President Roosevelt showed he would try anything. He knew people wanted action and that this was a rare opportunity for change. Plus he just enjoyed activity, of any sort. I can imagine how activity uplifted him, he wore these heavy metal leg things, for his polio. He was inaugurated in March 1933 when their was prevalent despair and unemployment had soared to about 17% Thus from March 1933 on he tried whatever struck his fancy. Plus he had a group of advisors called the “brain trusters.” Whatever they proposed, Roosevelt went with. The Hundred Days this period was called as President Roosevelt legislated galore. People hear that arts flourished during the Depression but now I know why. President Roosevelt (FDR) spent big money on them. He hired artists and had them paint murals--we have some in local post offices here near Roosevelt’s Hudson River home. He hired movie people and had propaganda firms made, burnishing the image of his actions, action which became known as the New Deal. Basically the New Deal was trying to help certain constituencies which Roosevelt chose. Essentially, the middle class or “everyman” or common man. And policies against the rich (even though Roosevelt was one of those). FDR started passing law after law seeing what worked. Lots of his laws were later thrown out, in the latter 1930s by the Supreme Court (which he then attacked by trying to “pack” the court, increasing the number of justices to decrease their vote importance). But the people knew Roosevelt was using government to help them for once. So he kept garnering support in spite of his arbitrary, sort of kingly behavior. Maybe because he was also able to charm his way through most any siutation.

SCHWARTZ SUMMING UP. Out of time this morning, so let me just summarize. Both President Hoover and President Roosevelt put government to work to stimulate the economy after the 1929 stock market crash. We still debate today whether that was the right move or not. Today our US government is following a similar path after a similar crisis. But the law of unintended consequences may again come into play; government may end up making things worse and thus cause a lackluster economy to last and last instead of allowing the natural process of the free market to clean out the old and bad and bring in the new. Still, if you were US president, what would you do? Be an ideologue? Sit back and stay out of the way? Doubtful since you’d be viciously attacked by the media and others to do something. As very interested bystanders, all the individual investor can do is sit back and watch developments and place them in historic perspective. Then plan out strategy. As of now, please just stay hunkered down and out of harm’s way as much as possible.