IBJNews

COAN: Stocks will get worse before they get better

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

paul coanLooking at the final years of the Great Depression tells me that next year might not be so kind to investors.

Comparing similarities between the Great Depression and the current Great Recession, we see not only what we’ve experienced over the past 20 years, but what could likely happen over the next two.

Although we are much closer to the end of the tunnel now than before this crisis, we still have another train wreck coming. A negative correction of around 13 percent in 2011 would not surprise me at all, followed by a whopping 30 percent drawdown in 2012.

Look back and judge for yourself the similarities of what we’ve just come through and where we may be going.

It wasn’t called the Roaring ’20s because money didn’t flow freely while consumers practiced frugality. The newly created Federal Reserve expanded credit by setting low interest rates and reserve requirements for big Wall Street banks. The Fed increased the money supply 60 percent during the period and by the end of the decade “buying on margin” entered the vocabulary as Americans overextended to speculate on the soaring stock market.

Banks offered the first mortgages. Credit soared. Thrift and saving were replaced by spending and borrowing.

Encouraging the spending, the 1920s had laissez-faire economics. Top tax rates were cut from 77 percent to 25 percent by 1925. Non-intervention into banking became policy. These policies led to investor overconfidence and a classic credit-induced speculative bubble occurred.

This all came to an abrupt halt in October 1929 and continued with major stock market swings through 1942.

Government expenditures surged between 1929 and 1936. With the government creating agencies and hiring people into make-work projects, private industry was crowded out. The expansion of credit, propping up of weak firms, and increased government spending on public works prolonged the Great Depression.

It could be said both the Great Depression and Great Recessions were caused by a Federal Reserve expansion of the money supply that led to an unsustainable credit-driven boom. In both cases, when the Federal Reserve tightened, it was too late to avoid financial collapse.

One important difference between the two eras was the passage of financial reform in 1933. The Glass-Steagall Act, designed to separate Wall Street investment banks and depository banks to prevent these types of situations, unfortunately was unwound in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

The repeal of Glass–Steagall removed the separation that previously existed between Wall Street investment banks and commercial banks and could be blamed for exacerbating the damage caused by the collapse of the subprime mortgage market that in turn led to the ongoing financial crisis that began in 2007. The Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation passed this year did not renew the separation.

The parallels between the two eras are uncanny. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan expanded the money supply after the dot-com bust, dropped interest rates to 1 percent, encouraged a credit-driven boom, and created a gigantic housing bubble.

By the time the Fed realized it had created a bubble, it was too late. The government response to the 2008 financial collapse has been to expand the money supply, reduce interest rates to 0 percent, borrow and spend $850 billion-plus on make-work projects, encourage spending by consumers, and artificially prop up housing through tax credits.

The government has sustained insolvent institutions with $700 billion and continues to waste taxpayer money on these companies. As with the Great Depression, the agony today is being prolonged by not allowing the real economy to bottom and begin a sound recovery based on savings, investment and sustainable fiscal policies.

However, did you know the stock market returned about 160 percent between 1920 and 1940, and about 161 percent (as of this writing) between 1990 and 2010? Yes folks, it has been that similar.

If we continue to look back to find out what 2011-2012 may have in store for investors, we should note that the markets were cut in half the last two years of the Great Depression before bottoming in 1942.

The upshot is that between now and 2012, we could lose half the market’s value.•

__________

Coan is managing partner of Wealth Planning & Management LLC in Indianapolis. Views expressed here are the writer’s.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Socialized medicine works great for white people in Scandanavia. It works well in Costa Rica for a population that is partly white and partly mestizo. I don't really see Obamacare as something aimed against whites. I think that is a Republican canard designed to elicit support from white people for republican candidates who don't care about them any more than democrats care about the non-whites they pander to with their phony maneuvers. But what is different between Costa Rica nd the Scandanavian nations on one hand and the US on the other? SIZE. Maybe the US is just too damn big. Maybe it just needs to be divided into smaller self governing pieces like when the old Holy Roman Empire was dismantled. Maybe we are always trying the same set of solutions for different kinds of people as if we were all the same. Oh-- I know-- that is liberal dogma, that we are all the same. Which is the most idiotic American notion going right back to the propaganda of 1776. All men are different and their differences are myriad and that which is different is not equal. The state which pretends men are all the same is going to force men to be the same. That is what America does here, that is what we do in our stupid overseas wars, that is how we destroy true diversity and true difference, and we are all as different groups of folks, feeling the pains of how capitalism is grinding us down into equally insignificant proletarian microconsumers with no other identity whether we like it or not. And the Marxists had this much right about the War of Independence: it was fundamentally a war of capitalist against feudal systems. America has been about big money since day one and whatever gets in the way is crushed. Health care is just another market and Obamacare, to the extent that it Rationalizes and makes more uniform a market which should actually be really different in nature and delivery from place to place-- well that will serve the interests of the biggest capitalist stakeholders in health care which is not Walmart for Gosh Sakes it is the INSURANCE INDUSTRY. CUI BONO Obamacare? The insurance industry. So republicans drop the delusion pro capitalist scales from your eyes this has almost nothing to do with race or "socialism" it has to do mostly with what the INSURANCE INDUSTRY wants to have happen in order to make their lives and profits easier.

  2. Read the article - the reason they can't justify staying is they have too many medicare/medicaid patients and the re-imbursements for transporting these patient is so low.

  3. I would not vote for Bayh if he did run. I also wouldn't vote for Pence. My guess is that Bayh does not have the stomach to oppose persons on the far left or far right. Also, outside of capitalizing on his time as U. S. Senator (and his wife's time as a board member to several companies) I don't know if he is willing to fight for anything. If people who claim to be in the middle walk away from fights with the right and left wing, what are we left with? Extremes. It's probably best for Bayh if he does not have the stomach for the fight but the result is no middle ground.

  4. JK - I meant that the results don't ring true. I also questioned the 10-year-old study because so much in the "health care system" has changed since the study was made. Moreover, it was hard to get to any overall conclusion or observation with the article. But....don't be defensive given my comments; I still think you do the best job of any journalist in the area shedding light and insight on important health care issues.

  5. Probably a good idea he doesn't run. I for one do not want someone who lives in VIRGINIA to be the governor. He gave it some thought, but he likes Virginia too much. What a name I cannot say on this site! The way these people think and operate amuses me.

ADVERTISEMENT