<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WILL IGNORING THE MISTAKES OF THE PAST RESULT IN A 20 YEAR BEAR MARKET?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:44:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6691</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:22:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6691</guid>
		<description>Dear TPC,


Once again a very nice piece but one thing jumped out at me.
As of today, the dependency ratio in the U.S. is 18% and is expected to jump to 25% by 2010.
Just wondering if that piece is correct?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear TPC,</p>
<p>Once again a very nice piece but one thing jumped out at me.<br />
As of today, the dependency ratio in the U.S. is 18% and is expected to jump to 25% by 2010.<br />
Just wondering if that piece is correct?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6652</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 03:11:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6652</guid>
		<description>What&#039;s really scary is that America and most of the rest of the world will be facing an age problem with most people retiring and less people going to work to finance them.  This will truly be one of the problems of our century.  Either the swine flu needs to be particularly lethal to old people or we are in for big problems ahead.  And if we have another war or pandemic that kills a lot young people?  I don&#039;t even want to think about that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s really scary is that America and most of the rest of the world will be facing an age problem with most people retiring and less people going to work to finance them.  This will truly be one of the problems of our century.  Either the swine flu needs to be particularly lethal to old people or we are in for big problems ahead.  And if we have another war or pandemic that kills a lot young people?  I don&#8217;t even want to think about that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TPC</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6649</link>
		<dc:creator>TPC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:56:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6649</guid>
		<description>Naa,

Shoot me an email.  I have a present for you.  

jt26,

You are correct.  There are many large structural differences which is why we won&#039;t follow the same exact path as Japan.  Also, we&#039;ve been thru a lost decade already....I don&#039;t expect 10 more years of negative stock returns, but I also don&#039;t think we&#039;re going to see above trend growth for the next 5-10 either....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Naa,</p>
<p>Shoot me an email.  I have a present for you.  </p>
<p>jt26,</p>
<p>You are correct.  There are many large structural differences which is why we won&#8217;t follow the same exact path as Japan.  Also, we&#8217;ve been thru a lost decade already&#8230;.I don&#8217;t expect 10 more years of negative stock returns, but I also don&#8217;t think we&#8217;re going to see above trend growth for the next 5-10 either&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jt26</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6646</link>
		<dc:creator>jt26</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:47:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6646</guid>
		<description>Although the J debt theories (Koo + others) are significant, the other problem with 90s Japan is, ask yourself, why invest in the people or companies?  Outside of Sony, Canon, Toyota etc. (which had done pretty well), my perception of Japan is of a rigid/slow government, society, labor, consumer and innovative capacity/acceptance.  I don&#039;t think the US has that problem (similarily, I always think it&#039;s a miracle that Israel even functions [huge political risk, boughts of 100% inflation, no natural resources, lack of global scale]).  There will be big losers in the US, and it is definitely headed for high structural unemployment ... due to the Fed postponing the pain for the last 20 years and losing the &quot;gains&quot; made during 85-90s restructuring ... but US dynamism will be a big difference ... the question is can our politicians inspire us to that.  Historically there have been many interesting depression/disaster comebacks: Nazi Germany, post-war Germany and Japan, China and the UK in the 80s, so the glass is also half full.  The greatest threat to the US is if unions reassert themselves (with the aid of protectionist policies) ... then you will really have Japan ... rigid/slow government, society, labor, consumer and innovative capacity/acceptance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although the J debt theories (Koo + others) are significant, the other problem with 90s Japan is, ask yourself, why invest in the people or companies?  Outside of Sony, Canon, Toyota etc. (which had done pretty well), my perception of Japan is of a rigid/slow government, society, labor, consumer and innovative capacity/acceptance.  I don&#8217;t think the US has that problem (similarily, I always think it&#8217;s a miracle that Israel even functions [huge political risk, boughts of 100% inflation, no natural resources, lack of global scale]).  There will be big losers in the US, and it is definitely headed for high structural unemployment &#8230; due to the Fed postponing the pain for the last 20 years and losing the &#8220;gains&#8221; made during 85-90s restructuring &#8230; but US dynamism will be a big difference &#8230; the question is can our politicians inspire us to that.  Historically there have been many interesting depression/disaster comebacks: Nazi Germany, post-war Germany and Japan, China and the UK in the 80s, so the glass is also half full.  The greatest threat to the US is if unions reassert themselves (with the aid of protectionist policies) &#8230; then you will really have Japan &#8230; rigid/slow government, society, labor, consumer and innovative capacity/acceptance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Naa</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6645</link>
		<dc:creator>Naa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:47:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6645</guid>
		<description>TPC, thanks for the excellent post. I would just like to add the following to your post...


Recession? No, It&#039;s a D-process, and It Will Be Long

Basically what happens is that after a period of time, economies go through a long-term debt cycle -- a dynamic that is self-reinforcing, in which people finance their spending by borrowing and debts rise relative to incomes and, more accurately, debt-service payments rise relative to incomes. At cycle peaks, assets are bought on leverage at high-enough prices that the cash flows they produce aren&#039;t adequate to service the debt. The incomes aren&#039;t adequate to service the debt. Then begins the reversal process, and that becomes self-reinforcing, too. In the simplest sense, the country reaches the point when it needs a debt restructuring.

We will go through a giant debt-restructuring, because we either have to bring debt-service payments down so they are low relative to incomes -- the cash flows that are being produced to service them -- or we are going to have to raise incomes by printing a lot of money.

It isn&#039;t complicated. It is the same as all bankruptcies, but when it happens pervasively to a country, and the country has a lot of foreign debt denominated in its own currency, it is preferable to print money and devalue.

What the Federal Reserve has done and what the Treasury has done, by and large, is to take an existing debt and say they will own it or lend against it. But they haven&#039;t said they are going to write down the debt and cut debt payments each month. There has been little in the way of debt relief yet. Very, very few actual mortgages have been restructured. Very little corporate debt has been restructured.

The Federal Reserve, in particular, has done a number of successful things. The Federal Reserve went out and bought or lent against a lot of the debt. That has had the effect of reducing the risk of that debt defaulting, so that is good in a sense. And because the risk of default has gone down, it has forced the interest rate on the debt to go down, and that is good, too.

However, the reason it hasn&#039;t actually produced increased credit activity is because the debtors are still too indebted and not able to properly service the debt. Only when those debts are actually written down will we get to the point where we will have credit growth. There is a mortgage debt piece that will need to be restructured. There is a giant financial-sector piece -- banks and investment banks and whatever is left of the financial sector -- that will need to be restructured. There is a corporate piece that will need to be restructured, and then there is a commercial-real-estate piece that will need to be restructured.

The Federal Reserve is going to have to print money. The deficits will be greater than the savings. So you will see the Federal Reserve buy long-term Treasury bonds, as it did in the Great Depression. We are in a position where that will eventually create a problem for currencies and drive assets to gold.

You print a lot of money, and then you have currency devaluation. The currency devaluation happens before bonds fall. Not much in the way of inflation is produced, because what you are doing actually is negating deflation. So, the first wave of currency depreciation will be very much like England in 1992, with its currency realignment, or the United States during the Great Depression, when they printed money and devalued the dollar a lot. Gold went up a whole lot and the bond market had a hiccup, and then long-term rates continued to decline because people still needed safety and liquidity. While the dollar is bad, it doesn&#039;t mean necessarily that the bond market is bad.

The reasons for China to hold dollar-denominated assets no longer exist, for the most part. However, the desire to have a weaker currency is everybody&#039;s desire in terms of stimulus. China recognizes that the exchange-rate peg is not as important as it was before, because the idea was to make its goods competitive in the world. Ultimately, they are going to have to go to a domestic-based economy. But they own too much in the way of dollar-denominated assets to get out, and it isn&#039;t clear exactly where they would go if they did get out. But they don&#039;t have to buy more. They are not going to continue to want to double down.

From the U.S. point of view, we want a devaluation. A devaluation gets your pricing in line. When there is a deflationary environment, you want your currency to go down. When you have a lot of foreign debt denominated in your currency, you want to create relief by having your currency go down. All major currency devaluations have triggered stock-market rallies throughout the world; one of the best ways to trigger a stock-market rally is to devalue your currency.

But there is a basic structural problem with China. Its per capita income is less than 10% of ours. We have to get our prices in line, and we are not going to do it by cutting our incomes to a level of Chinese incomes.

And they are not going to do it by having their per capita incomes coming in line with our per capita incomes. But they have to come closer together. The Chinese currency and assets are too cheap in dollar terms, so a devaluation of the dollar in relation to China&#039;s currency is likely, and will be an important step to our reflation and will make investments in China attractive.

A wave of currency devaluations and strong gold will serve to negate deflationary pressures, bringing inflation to a low, positive number rather than producing unacceptably high inflation -- and that will last for as far as I can see out, roughly about two years.

http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123396545910358867.html?page=sp</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TPC, thanks for the excellent post. I would just like to add the following to your post&#8230;</p>
<p>Recession? No, It&#8217;s a D-process, and It Will Be Long</p>
<p>Basically what happens is that after a period of time, economies go through a long-term debt cycle &#8212; a dynamic that is self-reinforcing, in which people finance their spending by borrowing and debts rise relative to incomes and, more accurately, debt-service payments rise relative to incomes. At cycle peaks, assets are bought on leverage at high-enough prices that the cash flows they produce aren&#8217;t adequate to service the debt. The incomes aren&#8217;t adequate to service the debt. Then begins the reversal process, and that becomes self-reinforcing, too. In the simplest sense, the country reaches the point when it needs a debt restructuring.</p>
<p>We will go through a giant debt-restructuring, because we either have to bring debt-service payments down so they are low relative to incomes &#8212; the cash flows that are being produced to service them &#8212; or we are going to have to raise incomes by printing a lot of money.</p>
<p>It isn&#8217;t complicated. It is the same as all bankruptcies, but when it happens pervasively to a country, and the country has a lot of foreign debt denominated in its own currency, it is preferable to print money and devalue.</p>
<p>What the Federal Reserve has done and what the Treasury has done, by and large, is to take an existing debt and say they will own it or lend against it. But they haven&#8217;t said they are going to write down the debt and cut debt payments each month. There has been little in the way of debt relief yet. Very, very few actual mortgages have been restructured. Very little corporate debt has been restructured.</p>
<p>The Federal Reserve, in particular, has done a number of successful things. The Federal Reserve went out and bought or lent against a lot of the debt. That has had the effect of reducing the risk of that debt defaulting, so that is good in a sense. And because the risk of default has gone down, it has forced the interest rate on the debt to go down, and that is good, too.</p>
<p>However, the reason it hasn&#8217;t actually produced increased credit activity is because the debtors are still too indebted and not able to properly service the debt. Only when those debts are actually written down will we get to the point where we will have credit growth. There is a mortgage debt piece that will need to be restructured. There is a giant financial-sector piece &#8212; banks and investment banks and whatever is left of the financial sector &#8212; that will need to be restructured. There is a corporate piece that will need to be restructured, and then there is a commercial-real-estate piece that will need to be restructured.</p>
<p>The Federal Reserve is going to have to print money. The deficits will be greater than the savings. So you will see the Federal Reserve buy long-term Treasury bonds, as it did in the Great Depression. We are in a position where that will eventually create a problem for currencies and drive assets to gold.</p>
<p>You print a lot of money, and then you have currency devaluation. The currency devaluation happens before bonds fall. Not much in the way of inflation is produced, because what you are doing actually is negating deflation. So, the first wave of currency depreciation will be very much like England in 1992, with its currency realignment, or the United States during the Great Depression, when they printed money and devalued the dollar a lot. Gold went up a whole lot and the bond market had a hiccup, and then long-term rates continued to decline because people still needed safety and liquidity. While the dollar is bad, it doesn&#8217;t mean necessarily that the bond market is bad.</p>
<p>The reasons for China to hold dollar-denominated assets no longer exist, for the most part. However, the desire to have a weaker currency is everybody&#8217;s desire in terms of stimulus. China recognizes that the exchange-rate peg is not as important as it was before, because the idea was to make its goods competitive in the world. Ultimately, they are going to have to go to a domestic-based economy. But they own too much in the way of dollar-denominated assets to get out, and it isn&#8217;t clear exactly where they would go if they did get out. But they don&#8217;t have to buy more. They are not going to continue to want to double down.</p>
<p>From the U.S. point of view, we want a devaluation. A devaluation gets your pricing in line. When there is a deflationary environment, you want your currency to go down. When you have a lot of foreign debt denominated in your currency, you want to create relief by having your currency go down. All major currency devaluations have triggered stock-market rallies throughout the world; one of the best ways to trigger a stock-market rally is to devalue your currency.</p>
<p>But there is a basic structural problem with China. Its per capita income is less than 10% of ours. We have to get our prices in line, and we are not going to do it by cutting our incomes to a level of Chinese incomes.</p>
<p>And they are not going to do it by having their per capita incomes coming in line with our per capita incomes. But they have to come closer together. The Chinese currency and assets are too cheap in dollar terms, so a devaluation of the dollar in relation to China&#8217;s currency is likely, and will be an important step to our reflation and will make investments in China attractive.</p>
<p>A wave of currency devaluations and strong gold will serve to negate deflationary pressures, bringing inflation to a low, positive number rather than producing unacceptably high inflation &#8212; and that will last for as far as I can see out, roughly about two years.</p>
<p><a href="http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123396545910358867.html?page=sp" rel="nofollow">http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123396545910358867.html?page=sp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CTC</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6640</link>
		<dc:creator>CTC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:36:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6640</guid>
		<description>TPC rocks.  Educating the public! Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TPC rocks.  Educating the public! Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Balinvadasz</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6629</link>
		<dc:creator>Balinvadasz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:53:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6629</guid>
		<description>Great analysis TPC, insightful as always. Would like to add one more issue which can  make things worse: the USD is the currently the worlds reserve currency and despite the noise, there aren&#039;t many real alternatives to it. This makes devaluing the USD much more painful for the rest of the world (which Japan could do), and this can ultimately severely limit the maneuvers the Fed can take.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great analysis TPC, insightful as always. Would like to add one more issue which can  make things worse: the USD is the currently the worlds reserve currency and despite the noise, there aren&#8217;t many real alternatives to it. This makes devaluing the USD much more painful for the rest of the world (which Japan could do), and this can ultimately severely limit the maneuvers the Fed can take.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keating Willcox</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6621</link>
		<dc:creator>Keating Willcox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:48:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6621</guid>
		<description>Domo Arigato!

A few questions...

1. What do the quadrillion dollars of derivatives do to change your ideas? Are these debt, or just debt if things go wrong?

2. What new problems are there with strategic default and jingle-mail, consumer and business decisions to abrogate existing debt agreements?

3. How much worse does it get with massive new cap-n-trade taxes, roughly $1,000 a year per household. Lowest 20% of households will see an invisible tax increase of 5% of income, an enormous jump.

4. Many renewable energy technologies are about to become cheaper than coal, so there is a plausible future of a continued drop in the cost of energy? That said, just as there were many companies for autos and planes, and now only a few, there will be a huge shakeout in green energy, with only a few big survivors.

5. Japan is, like, really, really old...but they have good medicine cheap. We are getting old, and really expensive medicine?

Again, thanks for your great essays.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Domo Arigato!</p>
<p>A few questions&#8230;</p>
<p>1. What do the quadrillion dollars of derivatives do to change your ideas? Are these debt, or just debt if things go wrong?</p>
<p>2. What new problems are there with strategic default and jingle-mail, consumer and business decisions to abrogate existing debt agreements?</p>
<p>3. How much worse does it get with massive new cap-n-trade taxes, roughly $1,000 a year per household. Lowest 20% of households will see an invisible tax increase of 5% of income, an enormous jump.</p>
<p>4. Many renewable energy technologies are about to become cheaper than coal, so there is a plausible future of a continued drop in the cost of energy? That said, just as there were many companies for autos and planes, and now only a few, there will be a huge shakeout in green energy, with only a few big survivors.</p>
<p>5. Japan is, like, really, really old&#8230;but they have good medicine cheap. We are getting old, and really expensive medicine?</p>
<p>Again, thanks for your great essays.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6620</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6620</guid>
		<description>Where did they get the 15% of GDP for Japan&#039;s trade? I was (mistakenly?) under the impression that they were a country of savers and exporters, what is making up the other 85% of that GDP?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Where did they get the 15% of GDP for Japan&#8217;s trade? I was (mistakenly?) under the impression that they were a country of savers and exporters, what is making up the other 85% of that GDP?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hfm</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/20-year-bear-market#comment-6618</link>
		<dc:creator>hfm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=9874#comment-6618</guid>
		<description>Very good analyse. Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good analyse. Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
