FTSE 10,000

Published in Investing on 23 August 2010

One economist predicts interest rates at 8% in 2 years. If you believe him, buy gold. If not, do nothing.

Did today's headline catch your attention?

Last month, Jason Zweig noted in the Wall Street Journal

"An extreme forecast doesn't merely grab your attention; ironically, it may strike you as even more convincing than a moderate prediction. A classic psychological experiment at the University of Michigan showed that 54% of people preferred an extreme prediction about stock prices to a more-temperate one. They apparently believed that a forecaster must have high confidence and a solid rationale in order to justify making a dramatic prediction."

Extreme forecasts are easy. My headline today could be construed as an extreme forecast. If I was right, I'd expect to be inundated with £1m job offers, TV appearances around the globe, glamorous women hanging off my arm whenever I stepped out in public, and be quoted ad infinitum on Bloomberg and the FT.

But what if I'm wrong? Firstly, my outrageous prediction would be quickly forgotten. Secondly, I could always blame something else, like the government -- today's popular whipping horse -- the Bank of England, buy-to-let landlords, Iran or China. I could take my pick. The list is endless.

Interest Rates Headed To 8%

It's within that context that you must read Andrew Lilico's warning that interest rates may hit 8% in two years. As reported in The Telegraph, Lilico, the chief economist at the Policy Exchange think tank, says the rise in interest rates could happen "as the recovery beds in and Government measures to stave off a recession lead to an explosion in the money supply."

Lilico also says a brief double dip recession early next year is likely, but it "would be quite compatible with a boom thereafter" before another recession in 2013 or 2014.

To be fair, Lilico fully admits his ideas are somewhat extreme, saying "The fact that scenarios such as mine are regarded as bizarrely unlikely is, to my mind, an indication that certain quarters have lost their sense of historical perspective..."

Buy Gold NOW

So what should you do now? Sell up all your shares and buy gold? Buy bottled water? Sell property? Emigrate to China, Brazil or Australia?

I'm doing nothing. Whilst I'm respectful and mindful of such "bizarrely unlikely" scenarios, I simply can't change course every time I read one.

Earlier this month, we featured one such extreme prediction here on the Fool, with Peter Schiff saying the US economy is "going to have runaway inflation and recession simultaneously. I call what we're going to have an inflationary depression, which is the worst possible depression you can have."

Schiff also said "There's no limit to how high gold prices will go. They will rise many times from here -- thousands and thousands of dollars per ounce higher. People will be shocked."

Maybe. But probably not.

Here's your chance to guarantee your place on the next enrolment to Champion Shares PRO! For 2 weeks in September we will be opening our doors to new subscribers to join our remarkable, one-of-a-kind investing service. In order to keep our exclusivity, only a select number of our one million plus readership will be able to join us. This is your chance to guarantee your place! Click here to join the priority waiting list

Follow Buffett

With investing, you have to play the odds. Warren Buffett has long encouraged people to invest with a margin of safety.

What if we're looking at a period of rampant inflation with interest rates soaring to 8% or even more? Lilico also warned inflation could peak at 20% rather than 10%pc, as in the 1970s.

What if?

I'd suggest the odds are firmly against such a scenario. Gilts markets are currently pricing in deflation, not inflation. The yield on 30-year gilts is just 4%, hardly suggesting we're in for a period of rampant inflation. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Of course, markets aren't always right. Although I'm talking about the yield on 30-year gilts, the bond market really only reacts to today's newsflow and expectations. Today, the bond market is suggesting we'll have a low-growth economy for some time to come.

2007 Revisited

But, it's worth remembering in 2007, markets got it all very horribly wrong, failing to predict the collapse of the stock market and the worst recession of our lifetime. Sometimes, it pays to be a contrarian. Always, it pays to have the courage of your convictions.

I'm not in the game of taking outrageous positions based on scenarios that have maybe a 5 to 10% chance of coming to fruition. It cost me dearly in the recent stock market crash, as my holding in Barclays (LSE: BARC) was smashed and my holding in Lloyds Banking Group (LSE: LLOY) was obliterated. It was disappointing, sure, but I don't have any regrets.

I do take some solace in the knowledge I was not alone in failing to foresee the great crash. Far from it. If I had my time again, I'd probably do the same thing. The global financial crisis, where banks across the world were simultaneously in grave danger of going bust, was simply a once in a lifetime event.

FTSE 10,000? Really? Maybe

You cannot invest for such black swan events. Did you see Warren Buffett, for all his warnings about toxic derivatives prior to 2007, sell out in expectation of a synchronised meltdown of the stock market and the banking system?

Interest rates may, bizarrely, hit 8% in two years. But in response, perhaps the FTSE 100 will hit 10,000. Bond prices will collapse as the yield soars, making equities look by far the better option in such an inflationary environment.

If I'm right, I'll be back. If I'm wrong, you'll never hear FTSE 10,000 from me ever again and it will quietly be confined to the archives of cyberspace, like so many other extreme predictions.

As for my level of confidence about the likelihood of my extreme prediction becoming reality, it may take some time.

More on the economy and the markets:

> For two weeks in September we will be opening the doors of our Champion Shares PRO newsletter service. In order to keep our exclusivity, only a select number of our readership will be able to join us. This is your chance to guarantee your place! Click here to join the priority waiting list.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

NeilW 23 Aug 2010 , 11:07am

He doesn't deserve the title 'economist' because he patently doesn't understand how money works. 'Publicist' would be a better title.

This is just a fantastical story from a publicity seeking group that finds column inches during the silly season when all rational people are sunning themselves somewhere.


dirtyandy 23 Aug 2010 , 11:59am

If you read the guys article in the Telegraph I think he is saying that the public will face interest rates of 8%, not that the BOE rate will be that. Is it hard to believe that the interest people are paying to the bank will be that high - IMHO not really.

At 10 Jan 2008, so two and a half years ago the BOE rate was 5.5%. I don't know what the average bank "margin" was but I got a mortgage in 2005 and mine is 0.29%. Lets say it was 1 to 1.5% so people were paying 6.5 to 7%. You had a look at mortgage rates lately? First time buyer at HSBC can get a life time tracker at the amazing rate of 3.99% over the base rate. I know lots of people that have had to remortgage or are on the floating rate, sitting around 2.5% above base rate.

If the BOE rate was 5.5% 2.5 years ago, is it really that hard to believe it couldn't return to that rate over the next two years, resulting in an 8% rate for a lot of people, and a 9.5% rate for some (and probably even worse for still others).

It seems unlikely and the UK has done well in preventing most people from getting in mortagee sale problems so I don't think they are likely to go that far now - but I don't think it is as implausible as people might think.

Basia02 23 Aug 2010 , 12:21pm

It is not very clear what 8% relates to and I agree that headlines like this are designed to garner coverage - as usual successfully.
I believe within 3 years, if the recovery continues, the base rate will be closer to 8% then 0.5. In 2007 you could get 7% interest on savings, so what were these banks charging in interest - not a paltry 8%. The base rate is disconnected from real interest rates at the moment. Basic monetary economics says that if you pump unprecedented liquidity into the economy - this must generate inflation. Add to this the decline in the supply of raw materials and increased demand then inflation here we come - it is just a question of how much. The recent deflation was puiblicised because for 70 years it has been unkown.
With the increase in savings rates, and the fact people and companies are not borrowing, isn't there an argument for reflating by increasing the returns on savings. We are in this mess because of all the borrowing, so why are we encouraging this, and not rewarding saving and the people who did not create this mess in the first place?

Netherwood 23 Aug 2010 , 1:03pm

A number of points
In 1990 I was paying 13% on my mortgage
The Government will fight tooth and nail to avoid deflation. The only way out for government is to inflate everyones debts away. They won't admit inflation but that what the will engineer it. They can't admit it because it means destruction of peolples wealth. At some point the only way to control run away inflation is to raise interset rates to very painful levels as Volker did in the states

FXEconomist 23 Aug 2010 , 1:15pm



If Lilico had talked of the outside possibility of paying 8% for a long term fixed rate mortgage, he might have been on safer ground as the Bank has to sell gilts to reverse the money pricing process they undertook and they are committed to reverse it (base rates meanwhile could be much lower).

He has written the whole article, which I have now read, assuming that the Bank does not reverse the printing presses which they can easily do and must do. It is unwise to say the least in my view to write this piece without considering this critical factor: especially as the press were bound to pick up on the 8% base rates / 6% CPI he predicts as his central scenario.

This article seems to be open to the criticism that it is at least partly designed for PR effect . The article was not up on the Policy Exchange web site earlier today. Now it is with links to press coverage prominent. This is not the way to conduct economics discussions: which are a particularly serious matter these days. They should organise a debate and give the opportunity for other to comment.

One thing to note is that he blames the narrow money creation for causing the mess to come (incl wholesale mortgage defaults) but in the same article explicitly supports more. Bizarre.

Graham Cox



TomRoundhouse 23 Aug 2010 , 1:18pm

This correspondent think that rising bond yields will be good for share prices. Ultimately, that might be the case but before such a sunny prospect is realised, equity prices will tank. The market will demand a higher risk premium in return for sacrificing the higher risk free income available from gilts.

bernie125 23 Aug 2010 , 2:04pm

I get a bit tired of these so called experts forecasting what is going to happen in the future. The guy might be right, but most likely he will be wrong. The fact is nobody knows where we are going from here. It is his opinion and it means little.

I forecast interest rates will be 20%, but then again they may be 1% or less.

theRealGrinch 23 Aug 2010 , 3:23pm

a climate of raising interest rates would surely push the stock market down as it reduced future company profits; thats conventional wisdom.

lotontech 23 Aug 2010 , 3:30pm

theRealGrinch: I can't remember who said...

"If it's Conventional, it isn't Wisdom. And of it's Wisdom, it isn't Conventional"

;-)

F958B 23 Aug 2010 , 6:14pm

Bruce

Don't get too attached to your rose-tinted glasses. ;-)

Although we're in a modest recovery at the moment (which should last another couple of years), the underlying problem - debt - has merely been shifted from private to public.
If anything, the total debt is now much greater, with consumers, businesses and government all drowning in debt.
We "solved" a consumer and business debt crisis, but we now have a looming government debt crisis.

I think that we'll be lucky to manage to get far into the second half of this decade without having seen another major financial event caused by the debt - or by the inflation that usually results when a government has too much debt and an economy that is addicted to government spending - subsidies, bailouts, handouts, beaureaucracy.....

RobinnBanks 06 Nov 2010 , 11:03pm

This was immediately recognisable as Bruce's article by the title.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.