One more time: Is this the Greatest Depression?


Last March, I posted on whether we were at the beginning of the Greatest Depression. Back then, my reasoning was that there was $6.1 trillion in financial toxic waste -- in the form of Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) -- in our financial system resting on a sliver, a mere $340 billion, in capital.

Therefore, a 6% decline in the value of that toxic waste would wipe out the bank capital. (I should have added in another $6 trillion in mortgage-backed securities). When you consider that Merrill Lynch sold $31.6 billion of its CDOs last year for 22 cents on the dollar, you realize that toxic waste needed an 80% haircut rather than a 3% one -- and voila -- you've wiped out all the capital!

If you look at some basic statistics comparing the current economic situation with that of the Great Depression, you might think that we are in relatively great shape. Our unemployment rate now is 7.2% -- at its nadir, 25% of the population was unemployed in the Great Depression.

Last year about 20 (out of roughly 8,500) banks failed -- compared to a third of all banks that failed during the Great Depression. (Of course those 2008 statistics fail to capture the magnitude of the failures and de facto nationalizations that happened last year). And at bottom, stocks fell 90% from their peak during the Great Depression; whereas they lost a mere 38% in 2008.

What jumps out at me is that it is not that helpful to compare the worst of the Great Depression with where we are now -- which could be the first inning rather than the worst part. New estimates suggest banks will take $3.6 trillion in asset write-downs before this is all over and that they currently have $1.4 trillion in capital -- this leaves a $2.2 trillion capital gap because banks need to add capital after they take write-downs.

Until that capital gap is closed -- and my hunch is that it could be bigger than $2.2 trillion -- we are in a deflationary spiral. That's because banks are going to be very reluctant to lend money, which will mean that companies and people can't purchase goods. Since 70% of GDP growth depends on consumer spending, that lack of purchasing will cause companies that make goods to cut their prices to get excess inventory off their shelves and then reduce their idle capacity.

This will add to the number of unemployed people who spend less and who can't borrow money to make up for the gap between their expenses and their income. So the companies will cut back further, which keeps the cycle going down. Perhaps economic stimulus can reverse this cycle -- I hope so, because the Fed and Treasury's combined $8 trillion in capital injections and loan guarantees have so far failed to do the trick.

Is this the Greatest Depression? I'd say it's too early to tell.

Peter Cohan is president of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College. His eighth book is You Can't Order Change: Lessons from Jim McNerney's Turnaround at Boeing.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Symbol Lookup
IndexesChangePrice
DJIA-89.2312,801.23
NASDAQ-23.352,903.88
S&P 500-9.311,342.64

Last updated: February 13, 2012: 04:39 AM

Hot Stocks

General Electric

18.875-0.255(-1.33)

Alcoa

10.29-0.35(-3.29)

Apple Inc

493.42+0.25(+0.05)

Google Inc 'A'

605.91-5.55(-0.91)

Bank of America

8.07-0.11(-1.34)

Wal-Mart Stores

61.90-0.06(-0.10)

Exxon Mobil Corp

83.80-1.08(-1.27)

Ford

12.44-0.25(-1.97)

Citigroup

32.925-0.735(-2.18)

IBM

192.42-0.71(-0.37)

Yahoo

16.14+0.14(+0.88)

Starbucks

48.82-0.38(-0.77)

Microsoft

30.495-0.275(-0.89)

Home Depot

45.33+0.06(+0.13)

DailyFinance Headlines

Benzinga Headlines

TheFlyOnTheWall.com Headlines

    BioHealth Investor Headlines

    WalletPop Headlines

    DailyFinance BlackBerry App

    My Portfolios

    Track your stocks here!

    Find out why more people track their portfolios on AOL Money & Finance then anywhere else.

    BloggingStocks Partners

    More from AOL Money & Finance

    BioHealth Investor Headlines

    Page Loaded in 1329125970906 ms.