Outside the Box

Hoisington Quarterly Review and Outlook

January 17, 2012

The "Quarterly Review and Outlook" from Hoisington Investment Management is one of the most significant pieces that crosses my desk – I try and drop everything else as soon as possible. This quarter's is no exception. The authors, Dr. Lacy Hunt and Van Hoisington, get right down to brass tacks with their opening sentence: "As the U.S. economy enters 2012, the gross government debt-to-GDP ratio stands near 100%." They cite an influential 2010 historical study of high-debt-level economies around the world, by Professors Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart, that concluded that when a country's gross government debt rises above 90% of GDP, "median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more."

And that, Hunt and Hoisington note, is exactly what is happening to us: "After suffering the most serious recession since the 1930s, the U.S. has recorded an economic growth rate of only 2.4%. Subtracting 1% from this meager expansion suggests that the economy should expand no faster than 1.4% in real terms on a trend basis going forward, which is virtually identical with the economy's expansion in the past twelve months."

Bottom line, say the authors: expect recession in 2012, here and in most of the world.

On a personal note, let me say that I consider Lacy Hunt one of the premier economists in the world today. It is my great privilege to call him up (even on his cell phone at night!) and ask questions and get to play the role of student, sometimes for hours, as Lacy takes me through the history, writing, and research in the economic world. It can sometimes be a tad intimidating, as he has seemingly read everything and remembers what he read and how it fits. I do take notes.

Hoisington Investment Management Company (www.hoisingtonmgt.com) is a registered investment advisor specializing in fixed-income portfolios for large institutional clients. Located in Austin, Texas, the firm has over $4 billion under management, composed of corporate and public funds, foundations, endowments, Taft-Hartley funds, and insurance companies.

Your thrilled to be in Singapore at last analyst,

John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Box

Like Outside the Box?

Then you'll love John's premium publication, Over My Shoulder. Each week, after sorting through vast amounts of economic, political, and investing news, John sends Over My Shoulder subscribers his pick of the week's most important commentary and data.

It's your opportunity to get the news John thinks matters most to your finances.

Learn More About Over My Shoulder


Hoisington Quarterly Review and Outlook

High Debt Leads to Recession

As the U.S. economy enters 2012, the gross government debt to GDP ratio stands near 100% (Chart 1). Nominal GDP in the fourth quarter was an estimated $15.3 trillion, approximately equal to debt outstanding by the federal government. In an exhaustive historical study of high debt level economies around the world, (National Bureau of Economic…

Discuss This

9 comments

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.

Comments

Ronald Nimmo

Jan. 20, 2012, 7:21 a.m.

Perceptive and important comment by Paul Kaestle. I wondered if anyone were going to mention it.

David Dukes

Jan. 18, 2012, 9:39 p.m.

While all this technical analysis is interesting, it seems to tell us the light at the end of the tunnel is an on coming recession train.  How about a few words on what the sugar we retired folk should do with our investments.  As I believe you cannot time the market, I am hoping my asset allocation is going to leave me enough deniro to make it through with out having to become a greeter at walmart.  I am also practicing the phrase “You want Fries with that?

Gerald Ferguson

Jan. 17, 2012, 5:39 p.m.

So long as our productivity keeps up, we need not fear too much inflation. 2% is about right. Alarm about hyper-inflation as been false. The USA with its fiat money will never be like the Europeans locked into the Euro, where they have no say in the amount of there money supply. “Debt Limit” is a congressional construct left over from the old Gold Standard. Our"Debt” as such is owed to ourselves, the Treasury gives and the Treasury takes away. So long as they keep a good balance we are doing OK in problem-filled world.

Frances Shepperdson

Jan. 17, 2012, 3:11 p.m.

I love economics gurus who point to Social Security and Medicare as the only way to cut expenditures in the federal government.
  Instead of requiring the banks to buy bonds, require them to make reasonable loans to reasonable businesses.
  Repatriate from the IMF and Europe some of the money that we created from nothing.
  I see waste every day with a solar research institute that has produced no saleable product in its history and no real improvement in any solar product. The thought that we can get rid of departments wholesale in the US government seems so farfetched to so many, but is really necessary. Energy is one that can go.
  Education was better when the federal and state governments were not involved. They increased the cost and decreased the educational levels.
  Housing? Really? Many indigent families receive adequate money for living, but still don’t pay their rent. Our county is laying out money for this through cards and then the family spends it on something else and won’t pay the owner. This comes from federal funds.
  Medical care for all. How is that going to be funded? It won’t save money, no matter what the idea was behind it. It costs more for the paperwork in the doctor’s office than for the actual face to face care. The average here is three paperworkers for one doctor. And when I tell them I owe them money and they don’t take it and then send me a bill for $10 that cost $20 to prepare, I just shake my head.
  Inefficiency is rampant. Start using logic and common sense to cut $1.6 trillion per year and the government could do it. How facetious is it for the president to cut 2-3,000 workers and $3billion from the budget?
  The pain would be sharp, but a lot briefer than the past five years have been.

Joseph Ambrose 23087

Jan. 17, 2012, 11:26 a.m.

Its refreshing to see an article based on logic, backed by credible evidence. We are inundated with emotional articles either for or against the current administration.

Well done!

Craig Cheatum

Jan. 17, 2012, 8:47 a.m.

I follow and agree with most of this analysis.  I don’t see any evidence of the central premise that the governments of highly indebted developed countries deprives the private sector of funds to grow and prosper.  Part way through, “Although the federal government debt to GDP ratio is surging past 100%, if private indebtedness is included our debt to GDP ratio exceeds 350%”, seems to demonstrate that the private sector has had plenty of access to capital.  Likewise, some say that US corporations have about $2 trillion on the books, and another $2 trillion offshore (patially to avoid repatriation and subsequent taxes), so it seems like there is no lack of capital, only at lack of opportunity cost at this point. 

Craig Cheatum

Kim Rampling

Jan. 17, 2012, 3:26 a.m.

A sound and rational analysis. There comes a time where even the biggest governments have to take the loss. Yet more money is not the answer, and it should have only been necessary to avoid a genuine melt down. And not a contious means of promoting a false form of economic growth. A growth that has produced yet more instability world wide.

Stan Haye

Jan. 17, 2012, 3:19 a.m.

The Hoisington Review is a beautiful thing. I not only read every word, it’s so well written that I even think I understand it. Maybe that’s because I agree—I have had my very modest portfolio 100 percent in short and medium term Treasuries since about ‘06, even though my investment advisor thinks I’m nuts, but I haven’t lost a dime.

Patrick Sullivan

Jan. 17, 2012, 1:06 a.m.

capitalism works in an expanding economy…..when the supply of capital is expanding….capitalism does not handle contraction well…...(adam smith compared the american colonial economy, which was in massive expansion, to the mature english economy….as usual, the master nailed it…...the wealth of nations is of course required reading, and really, required RE-reading…..note that mr. hunt quotes david hume…..who influenced adam smith immensely)

...john’s recollection of jobs appearing in the 80’s (and on) is a an incorrect historical analogy to our current time period…..this time period in no way resembles what america has experienced from 1983 until 1999, say…..that was an era of cheap energy, expanding credit (!), corporations finding global cheap labor, and technology productivity increases of massive proportions…..that is NOT the economy we find ourselves in today….“i don’t know where the jobs will come from , but they will” will probably be mr. mauldin’s most regrettable quote…..i would say our situation today most resembles england in adam smith’s time…..fully industrialized, heavily in debt (from fighting the war with the colonies!),  corporations controlling government to establish monopolies, thwarting the free market’s “invisible hand”, and controlling labor thru legislation and harsh business practices…..THAT is a much closer analogy to today’s situation…...this was the time of debtors prisons, child labor, and untold human suffering…..i don’t think the jobs will be forthcoming in any meaningful quantity….paying a high price for an education with debt will not work out well if there are no jobs at the end of the pike…..the country is poised for the most tremendous social crisis of its existence, since the last great depression, and the political system has no FDR, glass or steagal or any other political leader to address the fundamental economic issues…... really, a shameful performance by the banks, the corporations, and the government that they control…...