A really interesting long-term chart that contextualizes this market rally

Paul Volcker was the guy that raised interest rates and had the stones to "CREATE" a recession to kill the endless cycle of spiraling inflation in the 1970's. During those times and from the 1960's the workers had some power to go on the carpet and demand wage increases to keep up with inflation.

The UNIONS had enough power to demand a fair wage back then for a fair days work and they got it. The corporations bad mouthed the unions for demanding wage increases and used that as an excuse to not only recoup the increased cost of wages and bennies but also tacked on inflationary price increases for their products...........thus the workers went back in for more. It was an endless cycle that wasonly ended when Volcker raised rates to kill the cycle of endless inflation.Ronnie Reagan being a patsy of the republican party went in and worked on busting the unions along with Jack Welsh from GE. Welsh exported the jobs overseas for flu\nky wages and screwed the middle class worker. The sad part of that whole story is many of the UNION workers made good wages and sent their sons and daughters to college and when brainwashed in college they got good professions and forgot about the goodness of their hard working parents and became republicans and helped screw the middle calss of America. It has been all downhill since.

The best of times in America was when the UNIONS had power and the workers were treated as partners in helping the corporation to great profits and demanded a share of the pie. Today the corps screw the workers and view the workers as slaves. How far has that gotten us?

[edit] Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Paul Volcker, a Democrat,[5] was appointed Chairman of the Federal Reserve in August 1979 by President Jimmy Carter and reappointed in 1983 by President Ronald Reagan.[6]

Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983.

The federal funds rate, which had averaged 11.2% in 1979, was raised by Volcker to a peak of 20% in June 1981. The prime rate rose to 21.5% in '81 as well.[7]

These changes in policy contributed to the significant recession the U.S. economy experienced in the early 1980s, which included the highest unemployment levels since the Great Depression. Volcker's Fed also elicited the strongest political attacks and most widespread protests in the history of the Federal Reserve (unlike any protests experienced since 1922), due to the effects of the high interest rates on the construction and farming sectors, culminating in indebted farmers driving their tractors onto C Street NW and blockading the Eccles Building.[8]

Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz said about him in an interview:

Paul Volcker, the previous Fed Chairman known for keeping inflation under control, was fired because the Reagan administration didn't believe he was an adequate de-regulator. Our country has thus suffered from the consequences of choosing as regulator-in-chief of the economy someone who didn't believe in regulation.[9]

PS: when a country is in as much debt as the USA is..............What better way to pay back that debt but with inflated dollars? We are only in the second inning boys and girls. This is all uncharted territory. those that say we are being dooms dayers are only fooling themselves. We are in deep dung, believe it. :eek: HOG OUT!!!!
 
I concur that we are in a climate of competitive devaluation. In this game, the US has a distinct advantage so long as the dollar is the reserve currency. I also concur with the point made by Brettman that the Central Banks are most likely going to intervene to the extent that they can. I don't believe those who think inflation can be held down are correct however. Unless the US can somehow increase productivity beyond what now seems reasonable, I don't see any alternative to massive monetization, and that surely will lead to serious inflation. In recent times, inflation, not earnings, has been the primary driver of the stock market. When dividends are removed from the picture, we find that the return of the market in constant dollars over the past twenty years has nearly matched that of bonds. We are already seeing in the US some outsize inflation in products that are traded in the global market.
 
Quote from Kassz007:

That's the point. We don't know who the leader is or will be. We can speculate all we want on what sector or industry will fuel future growth but we won't know until after the fact. The fact remains that there is always SOMETHING that fuels future growth, we just don't know what......yet.
More...

Please see the attached chart. "Growth" has always been an illusion fostered by excessive leverage and debt. This is why the landing was so hard this time.

And you can see a sharp upward spike right about the time that Nixon took the USA off of the Gold Standard back in the 70's.

This game cannot continue forever. There is no asset inflation or real productivity growth, only more debt and printed money.
 

Attachments

Quote from brettman9:
And these two comparatively similar rallies have more than just speed and magnitude in common with the present move. (see attached Monthly DJIA logarithmic chart as companion to bullet points below).
More...

I would like to see the same chart on the S&P 500. Do you have one?
 
Quote from slapshot:

Please see the attached chart. "Growth" has always been an illusion fostered by excessive leverage and debt. This is why the landing was so hard this time.

And you can see a sharp upward spike right about the time that Nixon took the USA off of the Gold Standard back in the 70's.

This game cannot continue forever. There is no asset inflation or real productivity growth, only more debt and printed money.
More...

Leverage has artificially increased growth, but that does not mean that real growth does not exist as well (i.e. the internet). Technological advances and inventions fuel economic growth all of the time. Just because we cannot forsee what will fuel future growth as of right now, does not mean that future growth won't exist. If we could see where future growth will come from, we'd be incredibly wealthy.
 
Quote from Kassz007:

Leverage has artificially increased growth, but that does not mean that real growth does not exist as well (i.e. the internet). Technological advances and inventions fuel economic growth all of the time. Just because we cannot forsee what will fuel future growth as of right now, does not mean that future growth won't exist. If we could see where future growth will come from, we'd be incredibly wealthy.
More...


I disagree. The only real growth is population growth. For each item you mentioned such as technology that "grows" there is attrition (shrinkage) of older technology, jobs, and revenue.

In order for your premise to be true, the status quo would have to be fully maintained and then plus the new additions. But that is not reality. It is more a function of replacement.

Example: for each Green job created, there is one or even two jobs in energy or other sectors that eventually becomes eliminated or reduced as newer tech replaces old.

This is why NoBama's "grow the government and the Green stuff" economic plan will fail. At best, it is just running in place but with lower emissions. At worst, it increases costs/reduces profits by trying to force new tech to the forefront with political pressure.

Example: you cite the internet as growth, but try telling that to convention centers, airlines, railroads and some retail stores that have all experienced corresponding declines in business and employment or in fact been put out of business.
 
Quote from slapshot:

I disagree. The only real growth is population growth. For each item you mentioned such as technology that "grows" there is attrition (shrinkage) of older technology, jobs, and revenue.

Example: you cite the internet as growth, but try telling that to convention centers, airlines and some retail stores that have all experienced corresponding declines in business or in fact been put out of business.
More...

Seems to me the important part is productivity growth. And there has been, and will be, plenty of that.
 
Quote from brettman9:

Seems to me the important part is productivity growth. And there has been, and will be, plenty of that.
More...

Please explain what you mean by productivity growth. Do you mean that people work longer hours and therefore do more? There is certainly a limit to this, most people work about as much as they can stand to now, usually at the expense of their health and families.

Or do you mean that efficiency in manufacturing, etc. creates more with less? Which in turn means less employees and therefore jobs needed?

My point is that for every innovation or increase in one area, there is usually a corresponding decrease in another as replacement happens. (more or less).

This is why banks, investors, etc. have to resort to excess leverage to try and squeeze out "growth" that is not really there.

The chart that the OP posted is interesting but that long-term rise is really a function of inflation more than anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top