>Hmm. I don't want to draw you in too much - asking for precision on
>this crystal ball stuff is not fair.
>
>But usually the profit rate perspective is more like a 35 year half
>cycle. Of course there is NO reason it has to be that way (unless
>you are a Kondrotieff fan) - but we are talking about major
>era-defining changes - you tend not to miss their end. I would
>think they get undone by changes in the very core of the ame process
>that helped build a multi-decade (anemic) profit rise. Examples
>might be: big rise in the cost of labor, a big rise in taxes on
>profit income, a loss of overseas control, or the more nebulous end
>of a technological breakthrough (I myself can't see these technology
>issues as so outside the system).
Or how about a Keynesian style demand problem? With the labor market weak, U.S. consumption has been sustained mainly on mortgage equity withdrawals. It's the slowness to recover from the recession despite huge fiscal and monetary stimulus that I find strange and fascinating. And the rest of the world is mostly doing worse.
Maybe it's all about to change. The Manpower hiring outlook survey picked up. Maybe the labor market recovery will hit in Q4. Or maybe Japan will recover and the U.S. have a bad decade. Something looks and feels different, and I'm trying to figure out what.
Doug