Generational Chaos Ahead
By John Mauldin
| 
“This   generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny.”  
–   Franklin D. Roosevelt  
“Each   generation imagines itself to be more intelligent that the one that went   before it, and wiser than the one that comes after it.”  
–   George Orwell After a lifetime of watching financial markets, the speed at which traders react still amazes me. Sometimes it seems to me like they hail from the “ready, shoot, aim,” school of thinking. Economic trends almost never turn on a dime; and though we can look back and find a moment that was the exact bottom or top, there were forces building that caused people to move from one side of the boat to the other, tilting the economy or markets or society in a different direction. New data can alter our probabilities – but rarely as fast as trading algorithms seem to think. Long-term trends, by definition, change slowly. 
I   had that thought in mind when I asked Neil Howe to be our kick-off speaker at   the Strategic Investment Conference and invited Niall Ferguson to wrap it all   up three days later. As historians, they both gaze back through time to   identify patterns and draw lessons. They were the bookends who framed the   wide-ranging discussions in between. They have both been very influential in   helping me develop my understanding of the world. 
As I   said two weeks ago, the experts I brought to the conference, even the ones I   expected to be raging bulls, were mostly bearish. The surprise was Niall   Ferguson, who has become the new raging bull. That’s pretty much the one   thing you can count on at my conference: surprises! But you can see that even   Niall is deeply concerned about much of what is happening in the world. 
Now,   as I reflect, I see how the various crisis forecasts fit Neil Howe’s “Fourth   Turning” formula. Today I’ll tell you why. I’m going to do something a little   different in this letter in that I’m going to borrow wholesale from Neil’s   speech at the conference and his voluminous writings in order to give us a   view of what to expect in the next five to eight years. And given that the   Brexit vote looms next week and that it’s part and parcel of what Neil is   talking about, I will offer some final thoughts on Brexit. That should be   enough to keep us occupied for the next few minutes. 
Before   we dive in, let me note that I realize this letter is very US-focused. That   said, the concept of generations and turnings is not just a US or Anglo-Saxon   phenomenon. All nations, all peoples, experience their own recurring cultural   seasons and changes. No part of humanity is exempt from this process. Some of   my best late-night conversations with Neil have been about the generations   and turnings of different countries (especially China).  Sometimes, at the end of the evening, I wish that I had secretly recorded our conversation so I could have it transcribed and review it later. Alas, I’ve never had the foresight to do so. 
I   think the framework of “generational change,” and specifically the concept of   the Fourth Turning, originally appeared in a 1997 book by that name, written   by Neil Howe and William Strauss (who, very sadly, died a few years ago from   pancreatic cancer – a great loss) are very important in understanding what is   happening in our society. The concepts don’t attempt to explain the current   turmoil in its entirety, but they do enable us to frame our thinking about   our time in context, in the stream of history. 
It   is one of the great ironies of life that each generation believes its   experiences are unique. This is not unlike teenagers thinking that their   parents can’t possibly understand the emotions pouring through them, certain   that the old fuddy-duddies could never have experienced such emotions   themselves. The reality is that we have seen this movie before – with   different actors and main characters and plot twists and technological   devices, to be sure – but the basic plot seems to push along a hauntingly familiar   path. 
I   have to warn you: some of what follows won’t be encouraging because, as Neil   says, we’re in a Fourth Turning. Fourth Turnings are crisis periods, and we   are barely halfway through this one. But take heart: better times await us on   the other side of the crisis. 
Neil   has a research service that looks at how generations affect markets and   economics and products and companies. I find their work fascinating. The   service is not cheap, but if you are running a major fund or are responsible   for choosing specific investments, I think you will be richly rewarded with   ideas and insights for your dollar. You can learn more about Neil’s firm at www.saeculumresearch.com.   You can also see six free videos of interviews of Neil discussing a wide   variety of subjects, at Hedgeye.com. 
And   now I will try to take my notes from Neil’s speech and my familiarity with   his writings and distill the essence of his lessons. This letter will not   substitute, though, for your actually buying The   Fourth Turning and reading it; and those who want further   understanding can go back and read Strauss and Howe’s previous book, Generations:   The History of America's Future, 1584–2069. 
Every   parent who has watched children grow into adults knows that our personalities   form early in life. Psychologists from Sigmund Freud forward have generally   agreed: our core attitudes about life are largely locked in by age five or   so. Changing those attitudes requires intense effort. 
Howe   and Strauss took this obvious truth and drew an obvious conclusion: if our   attitudes form in early childhood, then the   point in history at which we live our childhood must play a large   part in shaping our attitudes. 
Howe   and Strauss added a corollary: it’s not just early childhood that forms us.   We go through a second formative period in early adulthood. The challenges we   face as we become independent adults help determine our approach to life. 
These   insights mean we can divide the population into generational cohorts, each   spanning roughly twenty years. Each generation, then, consists of the people   who were born and came of age at the same point in history. They had similar   experiences and thus gravitated toward similar attitudes. 
Members   of each generation are also individuals, of course. Family and other   circumstances leave each person more or less attached to the broader   attitudes of their time. Generational attitudes don’t determine everything,   but they’re still important. 
At   SIC, Neil illustrated the point with this cartoon. (I think we should now add   an illustration of a couple texting on their phones, saying “Let’s tell our   friends online first.”) Amusing, yes, but true. Young love, a universal experience, took different forms for Americans who grew up in the 1950s vs. the 1970s vs. the 1990s. Ditto for many other aspects of life. 
Until   recently it was unusual to have more than four generations alive at the same   time. Improved longevity means we now have six generations among us. 
Our   oldest citizens are from the “G.I. Generation,” or what Tom Brokaw famously   called the “Greatest Generation.” Born from 1901–1924, their childhood milieu   included World War I and the prosperous Roaring ’20s. As young adults, they   experienced – and eventually overcame – the challenges of the Great   Depression and World War II. 
The   Silent Generation, born 1925–1942, watched as children while their parents   met head-on the great economic and military challenges of that day. With the   exception of a few, they were too young to participate directly in the war   and entered adulthood in a time of post-war peace and prosperity. Howe calls   that period the “American High.” 
Those   two generations have now either passed away or are well into retirement. They   control a great deal of wealth, which gives them influence, but they no   longer wield the levers of power. That role now belongs to the Baby Boomers   (born 1943–1960) and increasingly to Generation X (born 1961–1981). Next in line are the much-discussed Millennials (born 1982–2004) and then today’s young children, whom Howe dubs the Homeland Generation (born 2005–2025?). The social and economic influence of these latter two generations is growing as that of the Boomers and Generation Xers declines. 
In   their unbelievably prescient and prophetic 1997 book, The Fourth Turning, Howe   and Strauss identified four generational archetypes: Hero, Artist, Prophet,   and Nomad. Each consists of people born in a roughly twenty-year period. As   each archetypal generation reaches the end of its 80-year lifespan, it is   replaced by a new generation of the same archetype. 
Each   archetypal generation proceeds through the normal phases of life: childhood,   young adulthood, mature adulthood, and old age. Each tends to dominate   society during middle age (40–60 years old), then begins dying off as the   next generation takes the helm. 
The   change of control from one generation to the next is called a “turning” in   the Strauss/Howe scheme. The turnings have their own characteristics, which   I’ll describe shortly. First, let’s look at the archetypes and how they match   the generations alive today. 
 The characteristics of each archetype aren’t neatly divided by the calendar; they are better seen as evolving along a continuum. (This is a very important point. It is why we get trends and changes, not abrupt turnarounds. Thankfully.) People born toward the beginning or end of a generation share some aspects of the previous or following one. Obviously, individual differences can also outweigh generational identity for any particular person. (We all know people who were seemingly born in the wrong era.) The archetypes simply describe broad tendencies that, at the larger societal level, add up to significant differences. 
Hero   generations are   usually raised by protective parents. Heroes come of age during a time of   great crisis. Howe calls them heroes because they resolve that crisis, an   accomplishment that then defines the rest of their lives. Following the   crisis, the Heroes become institutionally powerful in midlife and remain   focused on meeting great challenges. In old age they tend to have a spiritual   awakening as they watch younger generations work through cultural upheaval. 
The   G.I. Generation that fought World War II is the most recent example of the   Hero archetype. They built the US into an economic powerhouse in the postwar   years and then confronted youthful rebellion in the 1960s. Further back, the   generation of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, heroes of the American   Revolution, experienced the religious “Great Awakening” in their twilight   years. 
Artists   are the children   of heroes, born before and during the crisis but not old enough to be an   active part of the solution. Highly protected during childhood, Artists are   risk-averse young adults in the post-crisis years. They see conformity as the   best path to success. They develop and refine the innovations forged in the   crisis. Artists experience the same cultural awakening as Heroes, but from   the perspective of mid-adulthood. 
Today’s   older retirees are mostly artists, part of the “Silent Generation” that may   remember World War II but was too young to participate. They married early   and moved into gleaming new 1950s suburbs. The Silent Generation went through   its own midlife crisis in the 1970s and 1980s before entering a historically   affluent, active, gated-community retirement. 
Prophet   generations   experience childhood in a period of post-crisis affluence. Having not seen a   real crisis, they often create cultural upheaval during their young adult   years. In mid-life they become moralistic, values-obsessed leaders and   parents. As they enter old age, prophets lay the groundwork for the next   crisis. 
The   postwar Baby Boomers are the latest Prophet generation. They grew up in   generally comfortable times with the US at the height of its global power.   They expanded their consciousness when they came of age in the “Awakening”   period of the 1960s, defined the 1970s/1980s “yuppie” lifestyle, and are now   entering old age, having shaped the culture by virtue of sheer numbers. 
Nomads are the fourth and final archetype.   They are children during the “Awakening” periods of cultural chaos. Unlike   the overly indulged and protected Prophets, Nomads go through childhood with   minimal supervision and guidance. They learn early in life not to trust   society’s basic institutions. They come of age as individualistic pragmatists. 
The   most recent Nomads are Generation X, born in the 1960s and 1970s. Their   earliest memories are of faraway war, urban protests, no-fault divorce, and   broken homes.  Now entering mid-life, Generation X is trying to give its own children a better experience. They find success elusive because they distrust large institutions and have no strong connections to public life. They prefer to stay out of the spotlight and trust only themselves. Their story is still unfolding today. 
After   the Nomad archetype, the cycle repeats with another Hero generation, the   Millennials (born from 1982 through about 2004), who are beginning to take   root in American culture. They are a large generation numerically, filling   schools and colleges and propelling new technology into the mainstream. If   the pattern holds, they will face a great crisis. It will influence the rest   of their lives just as World War II shaped the G.I. Generation Heroes. 
And   guess what: we are all in that crisis right now. 
If   Strauss and Howe are correct, the four generational archetypes literally   created Anglo-American history. A new era, or “turning,” begins every twenty   or so years.  Four turnings bring a complete cycle, matching the 80–90 year human lifespan. 
The   Romans used the word Saeculum   to describe this length of time, meaning “a long human life” or “a natural   century.” In their book Generations,   Strauss and Howe outline seven full saecula, going back to the 15th   century. Much like the changing seasons, the turnings within each saeculum   follow a recurring pattern. 
The   first turning is called a High,   a confident time in which social institutions are strong and factions pull   together for the greater good. 
The   second turning is the Awakening.   This period is marked by cultural and religious renewal – changes accompanied   by resistance and conflict. 
The   third turning is an Unraveling.   People lose trust in institutions and embrace individualism. 
The   fourth turning is the Crisis,   a time of major upheaval when some great threat forces a redefinition of core   institutions and public behavior. US history confirms that the pattern is more than coincidental. Begin with a day when crisis was triggered: December 7th, 1941. The attack on Pearl Harbor might not (or at least should not) have been as surprising as many think, but it did mark the onset of a new crisis for a nation already dealing with the Great Depression. 
Eighty-five   years earlier, Confederate forces fired on Fort Sumter, launching the Civil   War and redefining the core institutions surrounding state’s rights and   individual rights. 
Dial   the calendar back another eighty-five years, and we find a group of men in Philadelphia   committing lives, fortunes, and sacred honor by signing the Declaration of   Independence. 
The   pattern continues: four generations before the American Revolution our   country experienced the 1689 “Glorious Revolution.” One lifespan earlier the   English navy defeated the Spanish Armada, which followed by a century the   bloody War of the Roses, creating Tudor England as a modern nation-state. 
Halfway   between these crisis periods we see Awakening periods like England’s   Protestant Reformation, the American Transcendental era of the 1820s and   ’30s, and the 1960s American spiritual and social upheaval. Like the seasons,   turnings unfold gradually, almost unnoticeably at first. They can also vary,   just as we experience warm autumn days and springtime cold fronts. 
Social   forces drive the turnings, just as planetary forces create seasons. At any   given time, four generation are alive: children, young adults, middle-aged,   and elderly. Each experiences history from its own perspective. If you were   six years old, listening to the radio with your 65-year-old grandmother on   December 7, 1941, you heard about Pearl Harbor together. Your reactions,   however, were quite different. You were on the way up; Grandma was on the way   out. And if you were a young man or woman, your reactions were altogether   different from those of the six- or the 65-year-old. 
Each   Fourth Turning is a Crisis. When Howe uses that word, he doesn’t mean a short   period of difficulty. He means an existential crisis, one in which society’s   strongest instititions collapse (or are severely challenged and stressed) and   national survival is in serious doubt. The Crisis can be economic, cultural,   religious, military, or all the above. 
Sound   familiar? It should. By Neil Howe’s timeline, we are today about halfway   through the Fourth Turning’s Crisis phase. We may have another decade to go.   When it’s over, we will be able to look back and see that important changes   occurred. 
If   this Fourth Turning is like previous ones, here is what we should see. See   how the following Fourth Turning characteristics match today’s headlines.   Remember, Howe and Strauss were writing all this in 1997, well before today’s   events. 
Rising   Community:   Notice in the Orlando shooting coverage how often people use the word community to designate the   different groups with which people identify.  
Following the tragic nightclub   events, Orlando’s communities drew together to support their members and each   other. We see the same behavior in other stressful events. “Je suis Charlie,”   the motto that emerged from the January 2015 Paris shootings, comes to mind.    
Think of all the other disasters we have seen in recent times, and the public   response to them. I am not suggesting that community comes to the fore only   during a Fourth Turning – far from it. But it does gain strength during such   periods. 
Strengthening   Government:   Small-government conservatives like me and possibly you are on the defensive.   We live in a time when most voters would rather enlarge government than   shrink it. We can expect to see stronger government action regardless of who   wins this year’s presidential election. 
Party   Realignment:   Donald Trump is obviously changing the Republican Party into something quite   different than it was just four years ago. Bernie Sanders, by forcing Hillary   Clinton to tack left in the primaries, may have done the same to the   Democrats. I don’t think this is over yet. We will see a lot of shifting and   movement between the two parties as they redefine themselves. I am really   quite taken with an interview that Trump did a few weeks ago where he talked   about his vision that the Republican Party would be a “workers’ party” within   four to eight years. You spring that on me four years ago, and I smile   indulgently. Now, within the framework of the Protected versus the   Unprotected, I wonder… (The background music has to be from my generation’s   chief prophet, Bob Dylan, and the song is “The Times They Are A-Changin’.”) 
Introverted   Foreign Policy:   Fifteen years on, the U.S. is increasingly tired of the War on Terror. Donald   Trump and Bernie Sanders both gained traction in the primaries with a less   aggressive approach to foreign engagement. 
Technology   to Scale: The   Internet has outgrown its adolescence and entered adulthood. The technology   industry now views the Internet as a platform on which to build new   capabilities: virtual reality, home automation, video content, and more. 
Rising   Income Equality:   The years of ZIRP and QE served mainly to drive up asset prices, enriching   those who are already wealthy and doing little for everyone else.  
Now a   backlash is building against wealth concentration. We may see attempts to   raise taxes on the wealthy, higher working-class wages, and other measures   intended to “level the playing field.” 
Wage   Disruption: In   the last year we’ve seen major retailers hike hourly pay; $15/hour minimum   wages passed in California and elsewhere; and there are growing calls for   labor to get a bigger piece of the pie. 
Fourth   Turnings bring social and cultural changes, too. 
Fertility   Bust: Birth   rates are now near or even significantly below replacement rate throughout   the developed world. Much of the Millennial Generation feels financially or   otherwise unprepared for parenthood. 
Falling   Immigration:   Both the US and Europe are trying to control immigrant flows.  
Refugees from   the Middle East are the exception in an otherwise less migratory world. 
Falling   Crime: Criminal   activity varies tremendously depending on where you are, but overall rates   are down considerably from the 1980s and 1990s. 
Strengthening   Family: This one   may seem counterintuitive with birth rates down and young people reluctant to   marry. My observations are that people delay marriage today precisely because they respect it so   much. They want to do it right or not at all. And once they do have kids,   they take parenting very seriously. My Millennial Generation children, Howe’s   Hero archetype, are amazingly protective of their children, as are all their   friends. They seemingly script every moment of their children’s lives. My three-year-old   granddaughter just started school, for God’s sake. My generation just didn’t   approach child rearing like that. (Okay, your personal mileage may vary as to   how you raised your kids. I am talking about a now-older generation, which   surprisingly includes me.) 
Practical   Culture: The   financial crisis forced a new standard of frugality on many Americans in 2008   and afterward. Now it has evolved into the “sharing” economy exemplified by   Uber and Airbnb. We even see the trend in fashion: Millennials have little   interest in prestige labels and much prefer the low-priced “fast fashion”   they can buy at Zara or H&M. 
Rediscovered   Norms: The   Fourth Turning is a time when people rediscover the values and norms that   launched the previous saeculum. That process can take many shapes, of course,   but we may again see the “all-together” ethos that brought the US through the   Depression and World War II. 
Overprotective   Parenting: My   Baby Boomer peers and I love to recall the unsupervised play and relative   independence of our childhood years. Growing up as a country boy on the edge   of a small West Texas city, I roamed the woods and ranches of our neighbors.  
The barbed wire fences were built to keep the cattle in, but they didn’t keep   the kids out.  
We knew which fields had the bulls we wanted to steer clear of.   We explored quarries and lakes and rivers, clambered down into caves, and in   general did things that would scare the pants off of today’s younger parents.   It’s not that my mother didn’t love me; it’s just that in summer, your kid   took off with all the other kids and came back in time for dinner. 
Maybe. We   might all end up at someone’s house, eating dinner there. Mothers would call   each other, and decisions would get made. I look back now and realize that it   was an idyllic time, and I wonder if it will ever come again. Neil’s work   suggests it will, but that’s hard to foresee today. 
Today’s   cautious parents won’t let children out of their sight – and often with good   reason.  
As the Crisis unfolds we should see growing concern for protecting   children from harm. 
So   after Neil Howe explained all this at the conference, it was time for   questions.  
Naturally I voiced the question that we all want to know the   answer to: “Will the Crisis be over soon?” Neil’s answer was succinct, and   not encouraging. He thinks we are only halfway through; and if the next few   years play out like past Fourth Turnings, the worst is yet to come. 
Why? 
Right   now we are in a period that roughly parallels the 1930s. Then, Franklin   Roosevelt was battling the Great Depression with vast public works and relief   programs. Could we do the same now? 
We   could, yes, but we have a problem. FDR had room for fiscal stimulus because   government debt was minimal. That is clearly not the case now. The next   recession, which would precipitate the next portion of the Fourth Turning   Crisis, will see our national deficit balloon to $1.5 trillion; and with the   off-balance-sheet requirements, the national debt will grow by $2 billion a   year, quickly bringing us to a $30 billion total debt. 
The   government is in hock up to its eyeballs, and the Federal Reserve has used up   most of its monetary policy tools. There is little room to add public   spending in one sector unless we take it away from another. 
And   the developing Crisis is not just a US problem. Europe is coming to realize   that it faces an existential crisis; in Japan Abenomics is losing   credibility; and China is well into a period of severe financial and cultural   struggle. The emerging markets will be tossed to and fro on the whims of   financial flows. Yes, there will be great technological leaps forward, and   over the next decade or two we will see three billion people move into the   middle class around the world – which will create an even greater potential   for cultural change worldwide. 
But   coming back to the US, who among us will give up the goodies we get from   Washington so that someone else can have more? While I see a few hands here   and there, my reading of the mood of the voters is that they’re not going to   willingly hand back their Social Security or Medicare or anything else. I   don’t talk to too many people who feel they are not being taxed enough. Dear   gods, in some states you are already paying 60% of your income in taxes. Yes,   that means you made a lot of money. It also means that many of you have   already thought about moving to lower-tax states or changing the nature of   your income. 
That’s   the problem we face now. The times are going to force major change upon us,   and none of us are going to be very happy about it, because the challenges   ahead are going to require a common sacrifice. Admittedly, it’s a different   type of sacrifice than World War II required, but it will be just as   wrenching to the people who are involved. 
I   really see no way around Crisis – which means we’ll have to plow straight   through. The message is, make sure you’re ready. The good news is that we   still have some time (even if we don’t know how much time). We can prepare   our portfolios and lives to deal with the coming changes. Properly handled,   meeting the challenges of a Crisis can be a very positive experience and one   that can benefit us as individuals, as well as our families and communities.   If you leave your future up to the vagaries of whatever forces are brought to   bear upon you, without planning and preparation, you will probably not be   happy with the outcome. 
If   you have not read last   week’s Outside the Box   and the links I put in it, I urge you to do so. As of today, the Brexit vote   is really too close to call. Even though the Leave contingent has a small   lead in the polls, in other previous separatist votes, like Québec leaving   Canada in the ’90s or Scotland leaving the United Kingdom two years ago, the   Leave contingent was slightly ahead in the polls but ultimately lost. The   Leave voters probably need to have a 3% cushion in the polls to actually pull   off a win for Brexit, as it appears that when we actually go into the voting   booth, the prospect of real change becomes daunting to some of us, and we   reverse our votes. 
That   said, the underlying cultural phenomenon we see is a rejection of the   establishment. I’m told by friends who live in Britain that you can’t turn   the TV on without hearing some authoritative economist or business leader or   politician arguing that it would be an disaster to leave the European Union.   The cultural and elite cognoscenti, the establishment, is arguing   strenuously, not to say desperately, for staying. And yet there is a huge   pushback from people who are more concerned about their day-to-day lives than   they are about the fate of their European overlords, and who don’t see that   the current leadership has improved things for them. They are seemingly   willing to take a chance on the unknown. 
This   cultural angst is not going away, no matter which side wins the vote in   Britain on Thursday. It is a phenomenon that is playing out all over the   world, but especially in the developed world. 
Finally,   if in fact the vote is to leave the EU, it is not clear what the immediate   economic consequences will be. It would be at least two and maybe three years   before the final agreements are confirmed and documents are signed. The most   important consequence may be the potential for “contagion” to the rest of the   European Union. The sense that the EU is a sinking ship will be heightened.   The concerns about immigration and lost national sovereignty will come   intensely to the forefront. The Deutsche Bank chief economist whom I quoted   last week excoriating the European Central Bank for its destruction of the   economic prowess of the EU will be joined by many other powerful voices. 
Where   are the strong leaders that Europe needs today? Merkel is increasingly   looking beleaguered, and she is going to have to pull back from some of her   immigration and economic policies if she is going to survive the vote next   year. 
Hollande is a lame duck who won’t even make it onto the final ballot,   where the conservatives and the National Front will likely meet in the   runoff. Spain’s next vote is right around the corner, and it is likely to end   up with the same decision as last time, which is no decision, with no government   able to be formed because of all the splinter parties that won’t work with   each other. Italy? It’s having its own crisis and can’t stomach the   leadership of Northern Europe. Ninety percent of the Dutch citizens polled   this month wanted their own exit referendum. Greece lurches from one crisis   to the next. Belgium? You’ve got to be kidding, right? 
I   could add a number of other factors, not just in Europe but globally. And   it’s not just economics. Technological change is going to force dramatically   different lifestyles in terms of work and social interaction on cultures that   are not really prepared for them. And unlike the 1870s through the 1930s in   the US, when we went from being a largely agrarian country to one that was   largely urban and manufacturing-based, these changes won’t happen over the   course of 60 years.  
The transition will seem more like the twinkling of an   eye. 
And   that is precisely what Neil Howe was telling us, back in 1997, that the   climactic phase of the Fourth Turning would be like. Were Howe and Strauss   looking forward and seeing the Iraq war? Brexit? The rise and then the   potential upheaval in China? No, they weren’t making any specific calls. They   were simply telling us that at this moment in time this is what happens in a   generational turning. 
It   is important that we understand the times we are in. Is our fate sealed? No,   not in the sense that we are all doomed and there is nothing we can do about   it. We are going to live through a period of stress and crisis. Coincidence?   Some will argue so, and maybe they are right. Some argue that seeing history   through a generational lens is shaping the facts to meet your story. Okay,   you can have whatever narrative you want, but the fact remains that there are   forces in the world today that are aligned to bring about a pretty damned   serious global crisis and recession. 
And   the recovery from the next recession will be even slower and more frustrating   than it has been from the last one, given the response of our central   bankers. If you think the mood of the country (pick a country, almost any   country in the developed world) is going to be brighter and happier in four   years when we are enduring yet another slow-growth recovery (or are still in   recession, with high unemployment and all of the stress that creates), then   you have a greater faith than I do in our current leadership’s being able to   navigate the challenges that loom. 
Do I   think it’s possible that we could avoid or largely mitigate the next   recession?  
Absolutely. I think I can see a path that would lead to an   improving economic situation, at least for the US. I don’t see much hope for   Europe. But do I think it’s likely that we’ll be so fortunate? Sadly, no. The   choices that would have to be made are so radical and so out of the mainstream   that the current political, economic, and monetary policy establishment will   just not be able to get their heads around them. They would have to reject   what are, for them, are core beliefs. I just don’t see it happening. 
Finally,   I suggest that you remember that we will get through this Crisis, whatever it   demands of us. Life will go on, and before you know it we’ll be on the other   side of the crisis, breathing a sigh of relief and enjoying a “Happy Days”   growth era comparable to the 1950s. Our goal is to make sure that we get to   the other side of the Crisis as well-prepared as possible, in order to   benefit from what will be not just a powerful new bull market but a glorious   expansion of human capacity and ability. 
I am   truly the most optimistic person in the room about the long term. It’s just   that I see a little stress and upheaval over the short term. And that’s what   we’ll be addressing over the coming year in this letter. Stay tuned… 
Speaking   of Brexit, I’m going to use it as an excuse to have a party. It turns out the   British polls generally report later than we are used to in the US, so that   6:30 PM here in Dallas is a good time to tune in for the results. Surely   somebody will be covering the vote live from London. Drop me a note if you’re   in the area and want to come by. My special chili, fabulous ham and beans   (never cooked together!), and guacamole and chips are on the menu. Summer,   friends, and great conversation – it doesn’t get much better. 
I   was in Cleveland for what was one of the most enjoyable NBA experiences I’ve   ever had, watching the Cleveland Cavaliers manhandle the Golden State   Warriors. Now, Cleveland came out hot, and Golden State never really got it   together. They made some runs but never could get within seven points. 
Normally,   that does not make for a memorable game. What was fascinating was that the   normally cool and nonconfrontational LeBron James and the league MVP, Stephen   Curry, were increasingly in each other’s faces. We ended up having to switch   seats at the last minute, so I didn’t get my “rockstar” seats, but I still   sat with my friend Dr. Mike Roizen in good seats that allowed us to watch the   Jumbotron easily. It was a little different from being at a Dallas Mavericks game,   because the camera focused on the faces of the players more than I was used   to. 
You   could easily read their lips and grok their emotions. LeBron and Steph were   openly taunting each other, giving each other the “look,” and from time to   time accompanying it with a few emotionally charged words and name-calling –   not exactly the language I’d want my kids using, but it did punctuate the   intensity of the moment. Then Curry got thrown out of the game on fouls, and   the crowd went nuts. You could feel the intensity of the players on both   sides at that moment. 
I’ve   been watching NBA for 34 years, and that was one of the most entertaining   games I’ve ever seen. I will confess that I don’t watch the NBA very often on   TV, and I certainly don’t sit and watch a whole game. I hate feeling like I’m   wasting time sitting through commercials. It’s not like the Super Bowl where   you watch the game in order to see the commercials. But Sunday night I’m   going to record the game, and about an hour in I will retreat to my man cave and   fast-forward through the commercials to watch this one. I don’t know whether   it will be the game of the decade or a blowout, but this is one I don’t want   to miss if game six was anything like a hint of the great B-ball to come.   Hearing about it after is not the same thing. 
I   know, I said I’m not planning to leave Dallas until I finish my book; but   Mark Skousen talked me into coming to his big libertarian blowout in Vegas,   called Freedom Fest. Since I’m not really doing a vacation this summer, I   thought I could go and moderate a few panels with old friends like Steve   Forbes and Rob Arnott. I have tons of friends coming to the conference, and   I’ll also do a breakout speech that I’ve have been wanting to do for quite   some time but that I know nobody will pay me to do, entitled “The Invisible   Hand, Evolution, and Why I Am an Economic Atheist.” It will be a short 20   minutes on a topic I have thought about a great deal and am passionate about.   Again, not a commercial speech. 
Shane   and I will catch a few shows (I will once again see the Cirque du Soleil show   called “Love,” featuring the music of the Beatles) and spend time with   friends. I will even catch some of the other conference speeches and panels.   You can see the lengthy list of speakers and topics by going to freedomfest.com.   It happens July 13–16 at the Planet Hollywood casino. I think there will be   something like 2,000 attendees, representing all wings of the libertarian   world. Trump spoke there last year, and I think Gary Johnson is speaking this   year. 
Then   I’ll be back home until the first week of August, when I will head to our   annual Maine fishing trip with a bunch of unruly economists. Afterward, I’ll   show up in New York for a few days. Then my calendar is travel-free until the   middle of September. 
Okay,   this letter has run long, so I will hit the send button and wish you a great   week. 
Your   wondering what the Brexit vote will be and who will win Game 7 analyst, John Mauldin | 
 
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario