Very Large Bubble of Government Debt
Simple question: how do you invest during an inflationary boom? Today, some concrete ideas. And the simplest idea of them all-when you consider soaring government deficits-is to sell government bonds and buy beaten down, world-class equity.
Mind you, this is if you want to be in the equity market at all. There is a very good case to be made for NOT being in the equity market this year, or only being in those asset classes and single stocks you think will appreciate (or grow earnings) faster than the rate of inflation.
But let’s be more direct and say that this is still a bear market. The bear market began in 2000 with the popping of the tech bubble. The Fed fought back in 2003, setting a low-interest rate policy the rest of the dollar-pegged world followed. This kicked of leveraged booms in residential housing, credit derivatives, and stocks, bonds and commodities.
All those bubbles are popping. You do not wipe out twenty-five years of credit and leverage excess in a mere eighteen months. We are barely halfway through the liquidation/loss realisation phase. The essential question is which assets are going to perform the best as governments inflate and create a new bubble in government debt? And by the way, it’s going to be very large bubble.
Forget the $1.8 trillion deficit the Obama White House admitted to. The true scope of government borrowing is breathtaking, and rather sickening. More importantly, you have to wonder where the money is going to come from, and what will happen when it’s not forthcoming from private investors.
Consider the chart below, courtesy of Niels Jensen, writing in John Mauldin’s “Outside the Box” e-letter. Niels shows that according to IMF estimates, twelve governments around the world (the ‘Dirty Dozen’) will have to issue $10.2 trillion in bonds to cover future banking losses and funding requirements in the credit markets as a result of the ongoing financial crisis.
The ‘Dirty Dozen’ and $10.2 Trillion in New Bonds

Ten trillion is a huge number. But there’s every chance the number is, in fact, a conservative estimate of government borrowing requirements. It is based on smaller than expected losses in the banking sector (the bogus scenarios modeled in the U.S. Treasury’s ‘stress tests’) and a lower-than-average increase in public borrowing to deal with a financial crisis.
The IMF estimate is that public sector borrowing will grow to an average of 27% of GDP in Western or industrialised countries. But according to a study by economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff published last year, governments almost always underestimate the amount of public borrowing that takes place in the wake of a banking crisis.
They do because—as the government here in Australia has done—they underestimate the blow to tax takings that comes from lower bank lending and lower economic growth. Tax takings fall while spending generally increases, especially borrowing to subsidise lending in key sectors like say, high-risk mortgage lending and property development. Think of the AOFM’s role in buying securitised residential mortgage backed securities and Ruddbank.
So how big could government bond borrowing needs get? Under the ‘best case’ scenario (lower loan losses, quicker economic recovery) Rogoff and Reinhart say public sector debt would grow to an average of 40% of GDP, leading to global borrowing needs of $15 trillion-50% higher than the IMF’s estimate. But that’s just the best case scenario.
Using the chart below, Reinhart and Rogoff suggest that in previous banking crises, government borrowing as a percentage of GDP has risen to an average of 86%. Under that scenario, now you’re talking $33 trillion in global government bond issuance in the coming five years to deal with the rest of the losses in the banking system.
The Mother of All Bubbles in Government Debt

You can see why we think all this talk of recovery and rally is a bunch of hokum. Maybe it won’t be quite 86%. Or maybe it will be more. But we know for a fact that global governments are going to flood with world with bonds in the coming years. But will investors buy them? If they don’t, you can expect much higher bond yields and much more money printing. That means inflation.
What does an investor do? Well it’s worth noting that Microsoft appears to be preparing for massive inflation by borrowing. The company is selling $3.75 billion in debt in order to buy back some of its own shares. Obviously Microsoft reckons the real value of the debt will diminish with inflation while the current purchasing power of the borrowed money allows it to buy back its own shares.
It’s a nifty trade and provides the example of buying equity in world-class businesses at cheap prices. There have to be a lot of investors in the world out there who see the endgame of this explosion in government debt and would much rather buy equity. That alone means the “weight of money” argument for equities could send shares higher.
We have to admit we are extremely dubious of this strategy because it says nothing about how these businesses will perform in a world saddled with so much debt. But we suppose if you are a truly a long-term investors and have decades to wait, buying equities at these lows is, a) a much better idea than buying government bonds, and b) about the only sensible investment strategy if you’re going to stay in the equity markets.
What does an investor do? Well it’s worth noting that Microsoft appears to be preparing for massive inflation by borrowing. The company is selling $3.75 billion in debt in order to buy back some of its own shares. Obviously Microsoft reckons the real value of the debt will diminish with inflation while the current purchasing power of the borrowed money allows it to buy back its own shares.
It’s a nifty trade and provides the example of buying equity in world-class businesses at cheap prices. There have to be a lot of investors in the world out there who see the endgame of this explosion in government debt and would much rather buy equity. That alone means the “weight of money” argument for equities could send shares higher.
We have to admit we are extremely dubious of this strategy because it says nothing about how these businesses will perform in a world saddled with so much debt. But we suppose if you are a truly a long-term investors and have decades to wait, buying equities at these lows is, a) a much better idea than buying government bonds, and b) about the only sensible investment strategy if you’re going to stay in the equity markets.
But let’s say you don’t want to buy-and-hold blue chip stocks. And let’s say you want to be in the market and not just in gold, vodka [or bourbon—Ed.], bullets, and canned goods. If you’re a “financial survivalist” what else can you do?
Try uranium and lithium (as investments, not meals). We reckon the government WILL decide that because energy is an industry that’s going to survive the credit crisis. China is building twenty one-gigawatt nuclear reactors at the moment. China will not be able to supply its own uranium needs. Australia, with over 30% of the worlds proven uranium reserves, is in position to capitalise, should it so choose.
According to Scotia Capital Inc. China strategist Na Liu, China’s nuclear industry will consume 15,700 tonnes of uranium per year by 2020. “At this rate,” she writes, “China’s currently known uranium resources can only last for five to 10 years. Clearly, in our opinion, it is imperative for China to secure long-term supply through imports or investment.”
So you see, for the resource speculator, an inflationary boom can be the best of times. It is a high-risk exercise. But junior resource stocks are one of the asset classes that CAN go up faster than the rate of inflation. And if, as we believe, the explosion in government bond issuance is going to lead to an inflationary rally in stocks, then dabbling the junior resource stocks and small caps is like hitching a front seat on a rocket.
Remember, this is pure speculation. You only hope your rocket is like Richard Branson’s new Virgin Galactic space plane, and not the nuclear missile Slim Pickens rides in Dr. Strangelove.
And what about red wine? The bottle shop across the street from the Old Hat Factory is closed for renovations. In its clearance sale, we were able to pick up a few bargain bottles of Penfolds Bin 389 Cabernet Shiraz. That is wealth you can either drink or store. We’ve done a little of both.
But you can also sell it! There appears to be a roaring trade in Penfolds wines on e-Bay. There are certainly worse things you could spend depreciating paper money on. We’re also hearing that the 2004 vintage of the Penfolds Grange is the best ever. Can’t wait to find out.
Regards,
Dan Denning
Australian Daily Reckoning
May 13, 2009





ShareThis


Dear Dan:
You did it again. Fantastic article.
Since the Obama Nation may yet drive all of us to drink, we may as well stockpile our favorite tipples and not worry about their investment potential. Chuckle…I still have two and a half bottles of the “Rommel Rum” and intend to drink it when on my death bed or if the barbarians storm my personal gates and it doesn’t look as though they can be beaten off.
You inspired me to go write an article about cookie jars, since I am not obliged to sound like a professional financial analyst and get a kick out of putting complex matters in simple, amusing ways that are nevertheless quite correct and complete. One thought while reading what you wrote was that Mama fills the cookie jar repeatedly, but she keeps eating the cookies herself in the middle of the night! By no means are you to consider that as a criticism of your excellent style (I’m speaking here as a professional Editor in my own right), and your incisive clarity and humor, just that I enjoy the advantages I have.
Gary, Luv, AGAIN, may we PLEASE have rich text and a much bigger window to work in? My e-mail is getting to be like the “video game” you two play, where I spend increasing amounts of time shooting down cyberspace invaders just to keep my box open (NO, I do NOT have a SPAM problem), and whimpering in anguish because I have to file things I really wanted to go back and respond to in greater depth. I’m sure you two have far more than I…
If I could paste Dan’s wonderful article down here and change color and font I could show my appreciation and admiration quickly and easily.
And if you give me back the ability to underline and italicize, I can show where the emPHASis goes!
Quick thought on Microsoft…from their (its?) viewpoint, buying back their stock is surely a grand idea. They think, one supposes, that they’re going to come through this period (who knows what they call it? Downturn, recession, maybe even the Big D word that rhymes with the R one) in command of the market, as well they may. The question for some time to come, though, is how soon and how long purchasing a new computer drops off and remains off the “necessities” list in the minds of beleaguered overtaxed payers or the jobless. We could even (if feeling more than usually conspiracy-oriented today) speculate that in a world where the Internet has been shut down the PC will become a typewriter that plays games with us.
Again, to get back to my TOIS system, there are great values available in new and gently-used laptops, in particular. Heartland, I think, will usually sell you a very nice one for around $400.
Consider, too, that the new ones are all VISTA, and with most users it is “hate at first sight” that we don’t get over! I bought a new desk top a couple of months ago, struggled valiantly with the changes, and hooked up my “old” (2003) one because it is faster and easier for me.
Charles has started an interesting conversation on celibacy in the priesthood, triggered by a current news report on Alberto Cutie, and we’re delving into our joint store of knowledge. My first thought was that the issue of Catholic priests not marrying (Episcopalian ones can, of course) and then the demand that they be celibate goes back to an obvious motive that would upset Catholics badly, no doubt: if priests don’t marry and don’t produce children, their possessions will end up in the Vatican’s coffers. Seems like it was one of the warrior popes who thought that one up…Charles said that while that may have been part of it, one of the early Pius popes was gay! Huh? Can you remember where and how you came by that interesting tidbit? We’ll have to go see if we can track it down. He then hit me with the thought that Paul, as well, was (supply your favorite euphemism.) Well, I’d believe almost anything about Paul. Not a nice man! Prove it? How about the time he egged some poor provincial on trying to get him to arrest him, Paul? Paul was a Roman citizen. He could have gotten the poor fellow killed, and he knew it!
Okay, this isn’t a site for theological debate, but you’re missing fun discussions, which have now proceeded to Elkhart banning smoking in all public places and bartenders howling, and our view that it would be far simpler, more Constitutional, and reasonable to leave such decisions to individual bar and restaurant owners. There would be “smoke free” places, and accommodation for the 28% of us who still smoke, as Charles and I do. Whutsa bar without at least SOME , smoke? Next thang yuh know they’ll ban drinking in bars!
Oh, all right, Charles and I don’t go to bars, but really enjoyable restaurants still have ashtrays. This is yet another example of the autocratic majority imposing its will on the minority, and we don’t like it, and since modern America views smoking with all the horror Victorians had about sex, wait until they foist socialized medicine on us and can scream that our behavior is bankrupting the system. Ted Kennedy, recently, suggested making smoking illegal! Shades of gin, marijuana, poverty, education, and other highly successful “wars.”
Thanks again for the inspiration, Dan.
Regards, LBT
[...] Very Large Bubble of Government Debt (tags: finance economy economics economic-crisis) [...]