IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
As a proponent of Fisher's "debt deflation theory of great depressions" Minsky's "Financial Instability Hypothesis", I see the current Wall Street/Nasdaq situation as a classic "euphoric" phase of the business cycle. Minsky argues that there is an endogenous cycle which leads from a debt-induced crisis, to (normally) recovery, to rising expectations as the memory of the previous collapse recedes, to a euphoric stage of asset speculation, to a bust when the asset market is flooded by asset holders wishing to capitalise their gains to finance increased interest rate burdens. The cycle can turn into a collapse if there is low inflation and no counteracting expenditure by government. We have the former, but inevitably government spending will rise, even given the austere present-day attitudes towards the welfare state. The odds are that, when this bubble bursts, it will be the biggest crash in history--far dwarfing 1929 and 1987. For a start, the level of overvaluation is unprecedented (in the USA--though the same occurred in Japan in 1983-89). The long-run average price to earnings ratio is 14; the Dow average is now about 35, S&P similar, while the Nasdaq is roughly 150 to one. These valuations are only justified if capitalism is about to enter a "new era" with growth averaging 20% p.a. for the next three decades. I don't think I need to discuss that scenario on this list! The main worry though, which convinces me that this will be more than the temporary glitch of 1987/89, is the level of private debt in the USA. Private (non-government) debt is now about 150% of GDP; according to Fisher, total debt in 1929 was roughly 60%. So even if the government provides the kind of counter-cyclical boost to cash flows which Minsky discussed, the scale of the private imbalance is so enormous that I expect it will overwhelm government cash flows for at least a decade--as it has done in Japan. The actual downturn may have to wait until all those baby boomers realise that, gee whiz, Amazon probably will never make a profit... And the valuations of all these bubble stocks will come down to earth, bringing down baby boomer wealth with it--and plunging quite a few into bankruptcy. God knows what the catalyst will be though, or when it will strike. I stuck my neck out in 1997, guessing that the breakdown had begun. In a strict technical sense, I was right--stock watchers argue that October 1997 was a broad market peak, and that--especially since August 1998--the broad market has been in decline. Only the value-weighted indices have disguised a general bear market (see http://www.cross-currents.net/charts.htm for a very good coverage of this). After Y2K appears to have been a non-event, there may well be another wave of euphoria that carries the market on through the normally up months until we once again strike October. If the sea of red ink across the internet sector sufficiently scares the market, then that could be the start of the first great depression of the 21st century. But ... who can pick when a mania will subside? When it does though, I expect that the Nasdaq's plunge will be truly historic, to answer your last question. The NYSE has a number of technical mechanisms which limit the rate of decline--market makers, trading halts on serious stock falls (2 1/2 and 5 per cent falls respectively trigger a half-hour and day closing of the exchange). The Nasdqa has none of these, and with on-line trading dominating its action, I expect that the panic will overwhelm their hardware and lead to the greatest valuation declines of all time. But as to when? I've given up trying to pick the American psyche on that one! As for other post-keynesians, the answer is a mixed bag. A lot of them are getting off on this notion of an "employer of last resort", and largely ignoring the stock exchange, or arguing that the Federal Reserve will flood the place with liquidity and overcome the problem. However others are talking of such things as "seven unsustainable processes"--a Jerome Levy publication--which they expect will lead to a Japan-style crisis in the US. Got to go--packing the bags for a short summer holiday! Cheers, Steve 05:34 2000-01-01 -0500, you wrote: >Re Steve K's [OPE-L:1999]: > >> I didn't want to see a serious Y2K effect, since if one occurred then >> in eons hence, revisionist economists would blame the approaching >> Wall Street meltdown on the Y2K bug, and not the market's inherent >> instability. > >Yes, the Wall St. market is inherently unstable. All markets are >inherently unstable. Risk, uncertainty, and instability are all >necessary aspects of the commodity-form. > > >Thus, you haven't really told us (yet) why you think that there is >an "approaching Wall Street meltdown". What, more specifically, >are its causes? > >What it be too much to infer from your suggestion that economists >"eons hence" will be discussing this "meltdown", that the >"meltdown" will be of a scale not seen by stock crashes in our >lifetime? > >btw, what are other Post-Keynesians saying now about this topic? > >In solidarity, Jerry > > Dr. Steve Keen Senior Lecturer Economics & Finance University of Western Sydney Macarthur Building 11 Room 30, Goldsmith Avenue, Campbelltown PO Box 555 Campbelltown NSW 2560 Australia s.keen@xxxxxxxxxx 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683 Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088 Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/ Workshop on Economic Dynamcs: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/WED
- [OPE-L:2006] Re: *What will happen in the 21st Century?*, (continued)
- [OPE-L:2006] Re: *What will happen in the 21st Century?*, Duncan K. Foley Sat 02 Jan 2010, 15:31 GMT
- [OPE-L:2020] Re: Re: *What will happen in the 21st Century?*, nicola taylor Tue 04 Jan 2000, 03:22 GMT
- [OPE-L:2055] Re: Re: Re: *What will happen in the 21st Century?*, Duncan K. Foley Sat 08 Jan 2000, 04:51 GMT
- [OPE-L:2001] Re: Re: Re: Re: Value Form (1972), JERRY LEVY Sat 01 Jan 2000, 22:55 GMT
- [OPE-L:2003] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Value Form (1972), Steve Keen Sun 02 Jan 2000, 00:36 GMT
- [OPE-L:2000] Re: A possible paradox in the theory of value, Steve Keen Sat 01 Jan 2000, 21:40 GMT
- [OPE-L:1999] Re: Re: Re: Value Form (1972), Steve Keen Sat 01 Jan 2000, 21:39 GMT
- [OPE-L:1998] Re: Various, Duncan K. Foley Sat 01 Jan 2000, 16:13 GMT
- [OPE-L:1997] message for Patrick Mason, Fred B. Moseley Sat 01 Jan 2000, 14:14 GMT