The Economy Is Bottoming

It's been a tough slug since this rotten recession began, bringing jobs and companies such as PotashCorp (NYSE: POT  ) , Blackstone (NYSE: BX  ) , and General Electric (NYSE: GE  ) down with it.

The good news is that the economy is in a bottoming process right now, according to Bruce Yandle, interim dean of Clemson University's business school and professor of economics at George Mason University's Mercatus Center. Yandle is perhaps best known for having developed a theory called "Bootleggers and Baptists" to explain political behavior.

"Recessions start when the economy is at peak growth," Yandle said on a recent visit to Motley Fool Headquarters. "The peak defines the beginning of the recession. Recessions end when they can't get any worse. We're getting to the point where we're beginning to flatten out. When we're flattening out, [we're] bottoming."

Yandle pointed to a couple of economic indicators that signify the U.S. economy is bottoming: the Institute for Supply Management's services and manufacturing indices. The ISM index for manufacturing, which sharply dropped from September (at the time Lehman Brothers collapsed) to December, has begun to recover, signifying that a bottoming process is in the works. The same goes for the ISM services index. Though still erratic, the index is moving upward. A reading of 50 on either scale is neutral. A reading above 50 means the economy is expanding; below 50, the economy is contracting. While the latest readings for both indices are still below 50, they are moving back up toward that mark.

Although the economy is troughing, Yandle said it won't actually post positive gross domestic (GDP) growth until the first quarter to mid-year of 2010, which he said will be tepid at best.

The long-term trend for our economy has averaged 3.5%, and he says we could see growth below that level in the coming years. "We're not getting back on the yellow brick road," he said.

Recovery drivers: The employed and entrepreneurs will fuel recovery
Who will we rely on to fuel economic recovery? Traditionally, the consumer is the one to help our economy out of the doldrums, and Yandle says this time is no different. While unemployment is approaching 10%, and, he says, will most likely climb to that level, he points out that "employment efficiency" is still at 90%. "It's that 90% of the country that is employed that will pull us out; not monetary policy," he says.

To that end, Yandle says those that have lost their jobs will be forced to be creative, spurring innovation and fueling recovery. According to Yandle, historically following every recession, the number of entrepreneurs, or "non-employer firms" (firms that have only one employee, with the rest being contractors), increases. Currently, 75% of firms in the U.S. are non-employer firms. Yandle thinks we're poised to have the largest surge in entrepreneurs in the next three to four years as a result of government policy and people who lost their jobs.

Risks to recovery
Though the economy has gone through much of this virus, there's always the risk that another shoe will stomp on the anemic recovery. One potential pitfall is a large number of adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) that are subject to adjustment over the next 10 months. Depending on which direction interest rates move, those mortgages could adjust up or down.

"There's a [potentially] serious hazard out there," he said. "If those interest rates go up, then we will have another wave of foreclosure, not as serious as the last one, but serious. Along with that comes the commercial real estate part. That shoe has not dropped and is going to drop."

Yandle says there's going to be more commercial real estate-related bankruptcies than we've seen thus far, which could be triggered by rising interest rates. However, Yandle thinks that, while we'll feel some pain, it won't be of the same magnitude as the subprime collapse we've already experienced.

Financial reform and the power of the Fed
There has been a lot of finger-pointing as people seek to address the downfalls of missing the financial debacle, which has infected the rest of the economy. As a result, the Obama administration has proposed legislation to overhaul the financial regulatory framework. One part of the proposed new rules Yandle favors is that regulators will be given the authority to handle situations such as the collapse of Lehman, or wind down "too big to fail institutions" such as Citigroup (NYSE: C  ) and Bank of America (NYSE: BAC  ) , which would be stabilizing for the financial system.

However, what worries Yandle most about the proposed regulatory reform is ceding greater power to the Federal Reserve. "The problem here is that the Fed would become a major regulator in addition to being the central banker," he said. Should the Fed obtain these powers, Yandle worries it would no longer be independent from the political process. He worries that politicians would now be able to control the Fed and influence, or skew, monetary policy decisions according to the interests of politicians and lobbyists, not in the interest of what is best for the overall economy.

"So now we have a Fed that will be controlling wealth and the ability to produce wealth by some huge enterprises," he said. "They will become the target of huge lobbyists like never before. It's to be expected ... this is a serious problem."

Related Foolishness:

Jennifer Schonberger owns shares of Bank of America, but does not own any of the other companies mentioned in this article. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Read/Post Comments (6) | Recommend This Article (22)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On June 23, 2009, at 4:41 PM, AWF wrote:

    Signs the economy is bottoming?

    Yandle pointed to a couple of economic indicators that signify the U.S. economy is bottoming: the Institute for Supply Management's services and manufacturing indices.

    These are bogus indicators as they are survey's not real data---below 50 and above 50 is nothing but BS!

    The fool's should have challenged the good professor for better indicators!

    There's a [potentially] serious hazard out there," Yandle said. "If those interest rates go up, then we will have another wave of foreclosure, not as serious as the last one, but serious. Along with that comes the commercial real estate part. That shoe has not dropped and is going to drop."

    Thats right-- one in a row for Yandle

    Recovery drivers:

    Who will we rely on to fuel economic recovery? Traditionally, the consumer is the one to help our economy out of the doldrums, and Yandle says this time is no different. While unemployment is approaching 10%, and, he says, will most likely climb to that level, he points out that "employment efficiency" is still at 90%. "It's that 90% of the country that is employed that will pull us out; not monetary policy," he says.

    This is a BIG question ? The Baby Boomers are in the savings mode not spending--These "consumers" have already acquired the things they need and want.

    These consumers Have Been the drivers of our economy but who is going to replace them?

    The great population wave has pasted ! There are less consumers in the 25-45 yr old range to spend and consume and drive our economy!

    Needless to say the BLS labor statistic is a good guess on unemployment -- but the real unemployment rate is much higher and the BLS does not report that number ! the BLS would rather adjust the birth/death model to understate unemployment.

    Again the fool's could have challenged the good professor on this point.

    Financial reform and the power of the Fed

    What worries Yandle most about the proposed regulatory reform is ceding greater power to the Federal Reserve. "The problem here is that the Fed would become a major regulator in addition to being the central banker," he said

    You are correct!

    Unfortunately this article did not provide any real data on the economy yr over yr month vs last month vs last yr any hard data that could be of value.

    I blame the Fool's for not challenging the good professor--I could always turn on the TV and listen to " Cramer"

  • Report this Comment On June 23, 2009, at 6:28 PM, jesse2159 wrote:

    Reaching the bottom is meaningless. However, if we bounce along the bottm for a considerable period of time it becomes a very real problem. There are more periods when the market did nothing for years and inflation ate into principal. I hope that doesn't happen again, because a stagnet market coupled with even slight inflation will leave us far poorer than if we got it over with quickly. That is why I wanted the banks to fail. Stimulus is only going to drag the pain out for several decades rather than a few years. As for the Professor? His opinion is a good as anyone's else's.

  • Report this Comment On June 23, 2009, at 7:42 PM, xetn wrote:

    The "good professor" sounds like a government spokesperson. The housing crisis has not even come close to bottoming if you believe these stats I posted earlier :

    http://mises.org/story/3513

    And according to Shadow Government stats http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data estimates real unemployment is approaching 20%.

    And as someone above believes, the consumer leads the economy out of recession, that is just plain wrong. Production leads the economy out of recession and the reason is simple; you cannot purchase anything unless and until something gets produced. Production results in employment (jobs) jobs do not result in production. If you do not believe this simple concept, try eating a steak without someone raising a steer, someone butchering that steer and someone transporting it to your local grocer. (Even if you own and raise the steer and do all the remaining tasks, you still must produce the steer before you can eat it).

  • Report this Comment On June 23, 2009, at 8:07 PM, AWF wrote:

    Xetn said:

    And as someone above believes, the consumer leads the economy out of recession, that is just plain wrong. Production leads the economy out of recession and the reason is simple; you cannot purchase anything unless and until something gets produced. Production results in employment (jobs) jobs do not result in production. If you do not believe this simple concept, try eating a steak without someone raising a steer, someone butchering that steer and someone transporting it to your local grocer. (Even if you own and raise the steer and do all the remaining tasks, you still must produce the steer before you can eat it)."

    There is NO production without needs and wants !!

    Where do needs and wants come from? oops

  • Report this Comment On June 24, 2009, at 8:05 AM, lebaresq wrote:

    Economic recovery will likely be led by mainland China, still sitting on trillions of dollars from recent years' trade which must be allocated to large-scale capital investment. Their infrastructure needs (transportation, power plants, water lines, sewage treatment, etc.) will fuel capital goods orders from US industrial manufacturers. Some of the recent runup in commodities has resulted from their stockpiling supplies through bargain-hunting, just tip of the iceberg of what's possible if they open the purse strings.

  • Report this Comment On June 27, 2009, at 6:17 PM, rfaramir wrote:

    AWF, we are born with a bundle of needs, and we have as many wants as we can imagine. No shortage there. Production is the only thing lacking, which produces wealth and the means of satisfying our needs and wants.

    “If a man doesn’t work, he doesn’t eat.”

    We need less regulation so we can produce the right things, and less taxes (confiscation) so we will have more of their value. Then we will start being better off.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 926659, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/27/2014 12:41:07 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement