It seems like only yesterday (but it was 1999) when it was common knowledge that investing in stocks was safe because, historically, the stock market always goes up. This was an oft-repeated piece of wisdom at the time, and my answer (although I usually kept it to myself) was to point out that it was 24 years between 1929 and when the Dow reached it’s pre-crash level. That’s a long time if you’re planning your retirement. The stock market boom was followed by a housing boom (“housing prices always go up”) and bust. Now, the same people are all convinced that government debt is the thing to focus on.
In each of the previous bubbles, there were clear dissenting voices. Alan Greenspan himself spoke of “irrational exuberance" in 1996. A lot of people were skeptical about the real estate bubble. I myself used the term “foreclosure mortgage” in 2004. For example, I advised friends to “get a 30 year fixed, not one of those foreclosure mortgages.” Their answer typically was “Don’t worry, we can just refinance.” I haven’t had the courage to ask how that’s working out for them lately (these were not close friends). Now, Paul Krugman seems to be the one who is trying to push back the tide (New York Times, June 28, "The Third Depression").
And this third depression will be primarily a failure of policy. Around the world — most recently at last weekend’s deeply discouraging G-20 meeting — governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending.I hope that he is wrong about this being a depression. I hope that we have learned to see crowds and panic for what they are. However, I’m not so sure.
To illustrate my point I'm including two figures from recent issues of The Economist. First, a graph from their special report on debt ("Repent at Leisure," specifically "In a Hole" ) shows the growth in debt. There has indeed been real growth in debt. It is a problem, and it's the subject of their report. However, it's personal and financial business debt that have been growing much faster than government debt. Furthermore, if the past is any guide (I have added labels to their figure showing which party was in the white house myself), we would be much better off under Democrats, which is not something that most of the people you hear talking about government debt appreciate.I also include a graph showing the price of gold (also from the Economist), which is the true bubble that goes along with the anti-debt [anti-]bubble.