Uncle Sol Starting a thought farm

11Mar/100

Government Debt at All Levels

National debt is one thing. Add state and local debt into the mix and you have to wonder how much of our resources are actually going to productive uses and how much is just going to pay off debt. At the end of 2009 or governments at all levels were over $15 Trillion in debt, more than $1.2 Trillion more than everything of value that was produced in this country last year including government spending. One wonders, how long can this be sustained?

My latest post at RGD is here.

Already this year the federal government has taken on more than $200 billion additional debt. While President Obama notes that we can’t keep spending the way we have, the current budgets before congress propose to greatly increase spending and further increase the deficit. While state and local governments are feeling the pinch throughout the nation and cutting back spending, it doesn’t appear that the federal government plans to follow suit any time soon.

by Carlton Smith
11Mar/100

Prescription For a New Economy

Karl Denninger rants this morning quite vociferously on what needs to be done to clear up the mess we are in. It wouldn't be popular. In fact, I would expect mass protests if this sort of thing were done. Yet, that doesn't make it any less true. The only thing I can think of that I would do differently is I would abolish the Federal Reserve outright. Here is an excerpt:

(It)...will happen - an "unexpected" recognition of the reality that what is being done today both is unsustainable and won't work, but we will do nothing appropriate about any of it until we find ourselves well-off the cliff and furiously pedaling in the air like Wile-E-Coyote - and at that point it will be to late to avoid the ugly consequences.

Read the whole article here. It's well worth the time.

UPDATE:

It's been pointed out to me that while Denninger's post is very well to the point, the actual consequences of these things are not specifically articulated. If you read the Market Ticker, you'll note that he has gone into more detail in other articles, but still, it's worth pointing out here to save you the trouble of reading through hours of archives.

Water always finds its level. This works in the physical world as well as within economics. If there is a supply of a scarce resource, and a demand for it, some system must be used to distribute it. For most goods and services in the U.S. we use the price system. We use it because it works. It isn't always fair, but saying so is like me saying that my ruler isn't fair because it never tells me that I'm over 6 feet tall. Price is simply a measure of the supply of a scarce resource and the demand there is for it in the market place. The millions of people making transactions over that resource are what set the price. Charge too much for it and you'll have a surplus (note the empty seats at Ford Field circa 2008). Charge too little for it and you'll quickly run out. Try to sell your mint collection of bootleg Beatle's LP's for a buck a piece on Ebay and see what happens.

This all makes sense to most people. But then, we don't think of things like interest rates as being prices. The interest rate I pay on my mortgage is the price of borrowing the money I used to purchase my home. But we don't use a normal price system for setting interest rates. We use a bunch of powerful people in Washington who have set up a very complicated system to set interest rates where they want them. One key to how this system works is the continued expansion of bank credit. By this I mean that over time banks have to lend more and more money to keep this system working.

However, some very thoughtful people like Ludwig von Mises and F.A. von Hayek, quite a long time ago pointed out that if you use the expansion of bank credit to expand an economy you will create inflationary bubbles in that economy, which will, by definition, at some point burst. Over the past couple of years we have seen some very big bubbles burst. First with the housing market, and then within the banking system itself. Water is finding its level. These things we are borrowing money for are going back to their true value, and we are helpless to stop it.

If you look at the statistics lately, the one statistic that really stands out is what the Federal Reserve calls Z1. It is the total amount of money being lent in the economy. In a debt based system such as we have, Z1 is the real money supply. This has contracted by more than 10% over the past two years. A 10% contraction of money supply is the textbook definition of a depression. What is happening is banks are scaling back the amount of money they are lending.

Why?

Why are banks scaling this back? This is a point that seems lost on many economists, but seems fairly obvious to me. Banks are keeping large amounts of cash reserves on hand instead of lending the money out. I've heard the President and Treasury Secretary complain about this on the news. The reason is that the banks know they are in trouble. These banks own the paper on the loans that have been drawn to purchase many things (mostly houses) that are now worth much less than the loans given. Every time one of those loans goes bad, the bank is unable to recoup the difference and that money simply disappears as tribute to the economy gods. It goes "poof". So, in order to keep from going under, the banks are not lending money, lest their asset bases evaporate. Though, it's recently been pointed out that if these banks had to mark their assets at the true value of the properties they have mortgaged, there isn't one bank in the U.S. that would currently be solvent. This is a problem.

So, in a debt based economy with lending contracting, less "stuff" is being purchased. The government is trying to counterbalance this effect by borrowing a bunch of more money itself and pumping it in to the economy. The trouble is that this never works. Government doesn't spend money the way that you and I spend money. So when government pumps money into the economy it makes it look like demand for certain goods and services is higher than it actually is, and when the water finds its level again, the producers of those goods and services find that they have over-invested in production and the bubble bursts again.

Yet Washington continues to try. Now, finally, they are running into the final problem. They can put as much money out there that they want banks to lend and they want people to borrow, but people just don't want to borrow it. People are at their limits with debt. They are concerned about their jobs. They just don't want to borrow anymore.

The real trouble is just beginning. As the government borrows more and more money to fund its stimuli and the economy refuses to recover, the ability to pay it back will come severely into question. When investors in that debt (people that hold treasury securities) begin to doubt it will be paid back, they will begin to rush to cash those securities in. And then the government will be forced to inflate more to pay it back (see Weimar Republic, circa 1930) or they will default. If the government defaults on its loans, the currency will tank. The best case scenario is that this will cause imported goods (including oil) to shoot sky high. The worst case scenario is that no one will be willing to take dollars in payments, as it has become virtually worthless. In any of these cases what will result is catastrophic. It doesn't make sense to go to work if they can't pay you in anything of any value. If you can't get paid you can't eat. Then you have to find a way to survive.

What we have at risk here is a systemic crash. The falling of an empire. The end of the U.S.A. So, when you read Denninger's piece, you can see why he's so upset. You can see why he calls for jail sentences for the offending parties. This isn't just a slump we're talking about here. It's survival.

by Carlton Smith
9Mar/100

Mildly Amusing if Utterly Obvious

Meandering about my RSS reader this morning I happened upon this piece from Cafe Hayek that I couldn't resist sharing. One wonders, if the the powers that be don't like prices performing the rationing of goods and services, then what, or more probably, who, should?

An Open Letter to President Obama
by DON BOUDREAUX on MARCH 8, 2010
in HEALTH, PRICES, REALITY IS NOT OPTIONAL, SEEN AND UNSEEN
8 March 2010

Mr. Barack Obama
President, Executive Branch
United States Government
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. Obama:

CBS radio news this morning ran a clip of one of your recent speeches. In it, you criticize insurance companies because they “ration coverage … according to who can pay and who can’t.”

My first thought was “not exactly; coverage is rationed according to who pays and who doesn’t.” Ability to pay isn’t the same thing as actually paying, and what insurers care about is the latter. Many folks – especially young adults – have the ability to pay but choose not to do so. They get no coverage.

But further pondering of your point leads me to look beyond such nit-picking to see fascinating possibilities. Not only insurers, but all producers who greedily refuse to supply persons who don’t pay should be set aright. Now I’m sure that you don’t ration the supply of the books you write according to any criteria as sordid as requiring people actually to pay for them. But our society is full of people less enlightened than you.

For example, the typical worker rations his labor services according to who pays and who doesn’t. That must stop. Oh, and supermarkets! Every single one rations groceries according to who pays. Likewise with restaurants, clothing stores, home-builders, furniture makers, even lawyers! You name it, rationing is done according to who pays. Indeed, my own county government has been corrupted by this greedy attitude: if I don’t pay my taxes, the sheriff takes my house – effectively booting me out of the county merely because I didn’t pay for its services.

Preposterous!

I look forward to your changing this selfish and unfair system of rationing that for too long now has kept Americans impoverished.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030

by Carlton Smith
5Mar/100

Economy in Recovery

I just read this piece and had to post something about the ridiculous system our Federal Government and central bank are creating. We keep hearing in the news and from our President and other politicians that the economy is in recovery, while at the same time unemployment is high and the government is spending trillions to prop up their statistics in measuring economic activity (GDP). In the mean time, a Nevada credit union is paying its depositors to withdraw their money because they can't afford to keep it on hand. From Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis:

The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) and FDIC parasites siphon off deposit insurance money from good institutions not willing to take risks, to support institutions taking excessive risks.

In turn, banks and credit unions sitting with high levels of cash lose money on deposits and the customers make zero percent interest, thanks to the Bernanke Fed holding interest rates at zero.

Priceless.

by Carlton Smith
4Mar/100

Greek Tragedy

The Greek government is now making noise about it being the responsibility of the European Union to bail them out of their current mess. As Karl Denninger points out, there is no money left.

Greece is now whining that their "austerity" should bring gifts - from Germany:

“We have fulfilled to the utmost all that we must from our side; now it’s Europe’s turn,” Papandreou told his ministers, according to an e-mailed transcript. “It is a historic moment for the European Union.”

No it's not.

Honest accounting is its own reward. So is fiscal prudence.

You're owed nothing Greece.

More importantly, there's no money. Not just there - here too. Witness the layoff/hirebacks in California and New Jersey's new governor - the latter who told the truth for the first time by a state politician in 30 years.

by Carlton Smith
3Mar/100

An Explosion of Debt

I posted an article this morning at the Return of the Great Depression blog on the recent growth of the national debt.

Amid these turbulent economic times we have seen many changes, not least of which is the change in the U.S. National Debt. The debt, which has been steadily climbing since the beginning of the last century, has, of late, taken an unprecedented surge.

We don't often think too much about the national debt. After all, if you are like me, in your mid thirties, then the fact that the government is in debt and the debt is growing is a fact of life. It's been that way all your life, all your parent's lives and all your grandparent's lives. You hear some noise about it now and then, but it hasn't seemed like anything really bad has ever come of it.

The real trouble here is not only the fact that we're in debt, but how much the debt has grown recently. It's very difficult for us to think in terms of trillions of dollars. The number is so large that our minds can't really grasp it. The closest I can come to getting a feel for it is when I think of a trillion dollars as being a million million dollars. I still don't think it really gives you a powerful enough grasp of it, but at least you can begin to taste it. And now we're adding trillions of dollars to the debt as if there were, literally, no tomorrow.

And that's where the question comes in. Will there be a tomorrow? Not included in this article because I couldn't find any corroborating sources (I couldn't find any contradictory sources either, I'm finding this information very difficult to come by) was a report I saw on Max Keiser where one of his guests states that the bulk of the debt over the past 18 months has been comprised of two year treasury bills. Now, just because the bill matures in two years does not mean that the owner will attempt to cash it in in two years, but as our economy worsens and holders of debt begin to doubt the ability of the borrower to pay, the likelihood that these will be cashed in greatly increases. And with over $2 Trillion in debt incurred over those 18 months, that is an awfully big price to pay in a very short time.

by Carlton Smith
1Mar/100

Consequences – There are Always Consequences

Karl Denninger posted this item a week ago at his blog, Market Ticker. It's poignant enough that I thought I'd share it here as well, even a week after it was posted. Denninger has been a leading voice, predicting our current economic predicament well before it came to pass. It seems to me these words could use as wide an audience as possible. Here is an excerpt. Follow the link above for the entire article.

Yes, I know all about the stock market rally from last March. I know all about the claimed GDP "improvement." But I also know that we got both by adding more than $2 trillion in debt to the United States - or roughly 14% of GDP - over the space of the last 18 months. That's about 10% of GDP annualized, and incidentally, a 10% GDP contraction is the common economist's definition of an Economic Depression.

So let's cut the crap - we are in a Depression right now. We are pretending we are not, just like you can pretend you didn't really lose your job so long as your credit card does not reach its limit. We have been in that depression for about 18 months and there is no evidence that we will exit it, as we have yet to find a way to pull back the deficit spending without an instantaneous collapse in the economy.

Yet at some point we must and will stop. We will either do so of our own volition, or we will do so when the cost of borrowing skyrockets, as others get tired of funding our profligacy. If we attempt to "print" our way out of it the cost of petroleum products will shoot the moon and destroy our economy anyway.

Follow this link to read the whole article. It will be time well spent.

by Carlton Smith
1Mar/100

Troubled FDIC

My first article on Return of the Great Depression has gone live.

The FDIC announced last Tuesday that the number of troubled banks has risen from 552 in the third quarter of 2009 to 702 for the fourth quarter and that the fund may have to cover up to $20 billion in additional losses by 2013. If the economy worsens, this number could rise. The New York Times reports that Sheila Blair, FDIC chairwoman, said Tuesday that it was unlikely the FDIC would need to tap its emergency credit line with the Treasury Department, but she would not rule the possibility out.

The FDIC is losing money hand over fist. The only way they could possibly become solvent again is if the economy makes a remarkable recovery, soon. However, property prices are not rising and the only reason that foreclosures aren't still dumping on the market is that banks aren't kicking people out of their homes when they don't pay their mortgages. When you add the coming Commercial Real Estate mortgage crises to all this, it doesn't look good.

Banks are failing one after another and the FDIC covers the deposits. They have asked financial institutions for advance fees to stay afloat, but are running low again. And that well can only be dipped once. Once the fees are paid, they are paid. Now the only thing left for it to do is go to the Treasury, and the FDIC doesn't operate with a guarantee that the Treasury will back it. Personally, I don't see the Treasury turning them away, given the uproar that such an action would cause.

One has to wonder, in the end, how much this will cost. I'm curious to find out, if when all of this is over they figure out that Federally insuring the deposits of bank customers allows banks to take on more risky positions, resulting in a greater possibility of going bust. Or will they just keep scratching their heads.

by Carlton Smith
1Mar/100

The Pretense of Knowledge

I confess that I prefer true but imperfect knowledge, even if it leaves much indetermined and unpredictable, to a pretence of exact knowledge that is likely to be false.

F.A. von Hayek, in his Nobel Prize lecture in 1974, shares some insights it would do well for all of us to take to heart. It doesn't seem like the numbers they are plugging into their equations in DC are causing the results they expected.

by Carlton Smith
Filed under: Economics No Comments
1Mar/100

Return of the Great Depression

Beginning today yours truly will be blogging along with Vox Day and Samuel J. Scott on all things economic at ReturnOfTheGreatDepression.com/blog. I will be focusing on the US Economy while Samuel focuses on Europe and Asia. Vox will write about whatever strikes his fancy.

You can look for 3 to 4 posts per week from me of some deeper substance along with daily posts to news items with a bit of detail. I will post excerpts of my longer pieces here, perhaps with a bit of commentary. Look for my first post to go live at 1:15 PM EST today.

by Carlton Smith
Filed under: Economics No Comments