This is not a ‘buyer’s strike’. This is recession

Posted on

What fascinates me about this piece is it's framing. As Foroohar goes on to note:

Currency Research Associates says investors would be wise to look at what happened in another period of declining income and production growth, between September 1937 and June 1938. Back then, after hitting a couple of peaks, equity prices plunged by 40 per cent in three months.

This typifies the piece. That fact that people are in poverty, or that they cannot feed their children is nit if apparent concern. What matters is the impact on share prices.

It so happens that I agree that a stock market downturn is very likely as  result of the recession I see coming. I should have thought that obvious. As Danny Blanchflower and I explained in The Mirror on Saturday, if people stop spending then other people lose their jobs, and a vicious downward spiral in incomes results. Of course that will impact share prices, just as it can also create a banking crisis due to bad debts.

But stock market and banking crises are the consequences of people not being able to meet their basis needs. Those crises are in that case not the issue of primary concern. And nor is there a ‘buyer's strike'. This is not voluntary. People are only spending on essential items out of necessity. And that suggests we are heading for recession.

Sure, share prices might fall in a recession. But the FT really should be talking about how people can make ends meet, and not the consequences for the wealthy of the inability of so many to now do so through no fault of their own.

 


Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:

You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.

And if you would like to support this blog you can, here: