Saturday, December 3, 2016

No problem

By the time you read this, the figures below will already be hopelessly out of date. But, here, courtesy of USDebtClock.org is the U.S. debt, as of Saturday morning.

US Debt at $19.9 Trillion

The current debt is $19.9 Trillion, rounded down. (What is the other $29.4 billion between friends?) And this debt is currently growing at about $1 MM per minute. Now, some market prognosticators and web-sites say a great economic boom is about to begin. Gulp! Really?

It is true we have just been through a period of economic growth - since the Great Recession of 2007 to 2009 - but that growth is uniformly described as "tepid", or "the most sub-par in history after a recession".

From an Elliott Wave perspective, this sub-par expansion we have just enjoyed fits best in the fifth wave position, after an age of Golden Economic growth from 1932 - 2000, which is best described as being in the third wave position, with the years 2000 - 2009 being best described as being in the fourth wave position - with the marginal new high of 2007 in the major indexes, the most classic of all Primary B waves.

So, now we have a republican president elect, and a republican congress - still pending the vote recount challenges outstanding - and some will ask, "What will a fiscally responsible - yeah, right - republican congress do?" Remember, Ronald Regan and George W. Bush were supposedly of this ilk, and they did nothing but expand the debt either.

For my part, I don't think it matters. As interest rates have risen recently, the rate of increase in the debt has increased even faster & faster, and not because of spending! This is a situation of the tail wagging the dog. It would be one thing if the debt was increasing to increase spending and fiscal stimulus - but now the debt is increasing even faster, not due to increase spending, but just to account for the increasing interest rates.

This is a growing problem, not one of more and more irrelevance. And, even so, fewer and fewer Americans went to polls to express their desires. Stock market bottoms are defined by crisis and panic. Stock market tops are defined by boredom and ennui. Welcome to the latter, as evidenced by the lowest voter turnout in 20 years, according to CNNPolitics! There's a sentiment gauge for you.

So, what will the new congress do, if allowed? Will they implement a flat, fair and simple tax that you can fill out on a postcard - and cause significant unemployment in the IRS? Will they dismantle several of the regulatory branches of government - like the Department of Education in an effort to cut spending - again cutting more government jobs? Who knows. But actions of this type - if they occur - are contracting, and not expansionary in nature. Or, will they just continue the sham, and continue to talk a good game while they, too, increase the debt?

No one knows for sure. But we already have evidence - by the GDP growth of the last eight years - that even this level of debt is a 'drag' on the economy. And, increasing interest rates are causing the debt to grow faster at this time. Just imagine if we have this level of debt and contracting types of policies are enacted into law. Even with a help of a friendlier Federal Reserve - if such is appointed by President-elect trump - economic growth could waffle even worse.

If 2016 - 2017 results in being the Primary V top, of the Cycle 5 top (the fifth we noted above) of SuperCycle 3 - the great period of U.S. expansion, then SuperCycle 4 would represent a potentially unprecedented level of sideways volatility in U.S. Indexes. A SuperCycle 4th wave would be difficult to predict (it could take on one of several forms - from a triangle, a flat, etc.), and it would likely contain very "jerky" movements upward and downward which could ruin accounts - while going largely sideways in the end from a millennial perspective.

As viewers of my video channel know - fourth waves are particularly difficult to predict. I have even given a special name to this phenomenon called the fourth wave conundrum in my video entitled, A Critique of Elliott Wave for Trading. But perhaps this fourth wave - when it begins - will initially mirror the personality of the president-elect. What has Donald Trump been, if unpredictable? That is the one constant of every purported news story about him.

And, maybe, just maybe, there is more here than the work of man. Given that the planet is growing warmer and warmer so far, with the hottest years on record in many cases, and that many people deny it - even given the evidence of polar and glacial melting; given that many areas are still experiencing either unprecedented drought or cycling between that and flooding; given that world population growth is still increasing and taxing planetary resources; given that there are few restraints currently on corporate growth or corporate irresponsibility; given that the political process put into office the person who got the fewer popular votes, then maybe the resulting downturn in social mood that is occurring or will occur is nothing more than nature's way. And, maybe the candidate elected is simply a reflection of the current natural state of social mood.

And, maybe, just maybe, if we are careful and true to it, Ralph Nelson Elliott's principle of natural stock market movement will help us navigate the trying times ahead. Let's hope so.

25 comments:

  1. global warming is a hoax
    core ice samples from the poles from last ice age show co2 level 10 times current levels...so it is NOT co2... look to that fireball in the sky to determine cooling and warming 600 year cycle...last little ice age in 1700s..now 2000s ie 300 years later is peak of cycle ..in 2300 you will have little ice age 2... regards phil

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like I said .. some people deny it. However, please cite your scientific reference and I'll be open-minded enough to review it and weigh it with the rest of the evidence.

      Delete
    2. It's absolutely a fact global warming is occurring right now. It's absolutely a fact 2016 will be the hottest year on record as far back as data goes. However, the reason(s) are absolutely debatable. The main problem is there isn't enough long term data to draw any simple conclusions.

      Delete
    3. Sentences 1 & 2 are correct. Sentences 3 & 4 are assertions on your part. I will simply remind you that there is a science called 'chemistry', and a branch of it called, 'photo-chemistry'. What it does is run experiments like, "If I put these two chemicals in an atmosphere similar to our own, then this is what happens when I expose them to light for prolonged periods." C'mon people. Stop obfuscating. Stop denying. Reputable scientists are doing their best here.

      Delete
    4. Couldn't agree with you more Phil.

      Delete
    5. For all you Maunder Minimum people, I am providing this link, and this excerpt.

      Little Ice Age

      The Maunder Minimum roughly coincided with the middle part of the Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America experienced colder than average temperatures. Whether there is a causal relationship, however, is still controversial, as no convincing mechanism for the solar activity to produce cold temperatures has been proposed,[12][dubious – discuss] and the current best hypothesis for the cause of the Little Ice Age is that it was the result of volcanic action.[13][14] The onset of the Little Ice Age also occurred well before the beginning of the Maunder minimum.[13]

      The correlation between low sunspot activity and cold winters in England has recently been analyzed using the longest existing surface temperature record, the Central England Temperature record.[15] They emphasize that this is a regional and seasonal effect relating to European winters, and not a global effect. A potential explanation of this has been offered by observations by NASA's Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment, which suggest that solar UV output is more variable over the course of the solar cycle than scientists had previously thought.[16] In 2011, an article was published in the Nature Geoscience journal that uses a climate model with stratospheric layers and the SORCE data to tie low solar activity to jet stream behavior and mild winters in some places (southern Europe and Canada/Greenland) and colder winters in others (northern Europe and the United States).[17] In Europe, examples of very cold winters are 1683-84, 1694–95, and the winter of 1708–09.[18]

      Note that the term "Little Ice Age" applied to the Maunder minimum is something of a misnomer as it implies a period of unremitting cold (and on a global scale), which is not the case. For example, the coldest winter in the Central England Temperature record is 1683-84, but the winter just two years later (both in the middle of the Maunder minimum) was the fifth warmest in the whole 350-year CET record. Furthermore, summers during the Maunder minimum were not significantly different from those seen in subsequent years. The drop in global average temperatures in paleoclimate reconstructions at the start of the Little Ice Age was between about 1560 and 1600, whereas the Maunder minimum began almost 50 years later.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

      The article is well-annotated with the references. Also, I note Phil did not provide references, as requested.

      Delete
    6. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

      i should have stated that co2 as the cause of global warming is a hoax..

      there may be minimal increase in earth temperature but it is not significant when the earths temperature history is considered..and is probably cyclic as seen in the charts

      also volcanic eruptions limit the amount of energy from the sun reaching the earth again suggesting the suns role in this'..

      as far as climate change......the climate has ALWAYS been changing since the earthwas born

      regards phil

      Delete
    7. Really Phil. A web-site run by an individual? Monte Hieb? How about using the reputable work of the Department of Energy (DOE).

      "There is a close correlation between Antarctic temperature and atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (Barnola et al. 1987). The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows that the main trends of CO2 are similar for each glacial cycle. Major transitions from the lowest to the highest values are associated with glacial-interglacial transitions. During these transitions, the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 rises from 180 to 280-300 ppmv (Petit et al. 1999). The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows the present-day levels of CO2 are unprecedented during the past 420 kyr. "

      http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.html

      Delete
    8. Really Joe. A web site run by the government ? and government data ?

      Delete
    9. by the time its all confirmed one way or the other we will have been LONG gone ..............

      Delete
    10. To the point of being long gone ... the plant stomata data attempts to fill in the Co2 record from 500k years ago and more. If you recall your archaeology, ancient hominids (i.e. only chance for Homo Sapiens) dates right to 440k years ago - where the ice core record stops. Before that, you are looking at Homo Erectus. Let's say early conditions were 'different', we certainly hadn't evolved to survive in them at whatever conditions there were. It took a full species change before we modern humans could live. Now you want to go back to those conditions -- if they existed?

      Further, the biggest problem I have with the plant stomata data is that even the article says, "up to 400k years ago, we used carbon dating - after that we used 'other methods'?" Other methods? What other methods?

      Scientifically, it's my experience the further back ones goes in time, the more 'fuzzy' one's information becomes, and the further ahead in the future one goes, the less reliable a prediction becomes.

      Yet, 'you' are the one claiming a 'hoax', and to do that you must have incontrovertible data. This is your responsibility not mine. You must be able to pull the curtain open, and show the Mighty Oz as it were. You haven't done that.

      And so, what we are left with is the Russian ice core samples verify the Greenland ice core data: same results from two geographically separated locations. Both show that while Homo Sapiens have roamed the earth, we have never experienced higher levels of Co2.

      I am open-minded enough to say, 'I do not know' how this will fit with marine core samples or other experiments, but what I don't see is any 'incentive' for the government to lie. What do they have to gain? To the government, what does it matter if we burn coal, or gradually switch to solar, wind and geothermal? A hoax does not make logical sense.

      Delete
    11. joe really????

      why would govt lie???? wake up! you cannot be serious ... they would do anything to promote their green agenda or any other agenda they have ..

      but enough of this ...i suspect you have been lurking at tonys site..and if so you may have seen my post.....

      it is of little practical interest to me what is going to happen 10 or 20 years from now...i am only concerned with what happens next week or next month ...you can continue your mental masturbation but i really dont care how many angels can dance on the head of a pin..

      Delete
    12. No Phil. The Russian study was conducted and reported by a Frenchman and a Russian. You would have had to have had two foreign operatives lie in favor of the U.S. Government. Why would they do that? Talk about absurdities. So far, they are on your part.

      But, if you continue your rude and/or profane comments, then I will have no problem banning your account from this site. There is no need for it. Stick to the facts.

      Delete
  2. Hi joe
    Very good summary
    Just know where the market is to anticipate the future
    Final phase V ???????

    ReplyDelete
  3. What is the link to your video channel referred to in your post, please?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is the address of my YouTube Channel. I encourage you to review the Critique of Elliott Wave for Trading, video, first.

      https://www.youtube.com/user/ElliottTrader/videos?shelf_id=4&view=0&sort=dd

      Delete
  4. SALUT JOE
      I trust you in your elliot count
    Now I wait for the top of the phase V that will end I do not know when
    Between December and March as you say and after falling until?

    THANK YOU for your reply joe

    ReplyDelete
  5. Joe
      The drop phase of after you will last combeb of time ??
    SP500 VA DE 2200 How many ??

    Thank you for your answer

    ReplyDelete
  6. Joe
      The drop phase after you will last how long ??
    SP500 VA DE 2200 How many ??

    Thank you for your answer

    ReplyDelete
  7. Replies
    1. Still waiting to see if both of the overlaps occur. So far, only one has happened. No count updates until then.

      Delete
  8. Thank you as always Joe!
    You know I have always appreciated your teaching.

    I'm not into politics anymore. Yes I know as Plato said: “One of the penalties of refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” But does it really matter anymore? Haven't we already reached point of no return? - debt clock counting or not. I have come to realize that the old cycle of mankind first acting after realizing when to late; is a universal and repetitive pattern.

    “Human behavior flows from three main sources: desire, emotion, and knowledge. Education is teaching our children to desire the right things.” Plato.

    Does the majority still chery that effort or has.... well anyway maybe good old days is a false perception. “How can we prove whether at this moment we are sleeping, and all our thoughts are a dream; or whether we are awake, and writing to one another in the waking state? ”

    Take care and have a Merry Christmas. All the best to you and yours!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks for being brave in your comments on global warming. I have no idea why some of my friends (who are very smart and hard working) deny the evidence without taking the time to review the overwhelmingly strong conviction from climate scientists.

    ReplyDelete