Posts Tagged: Greece

Banking / Economics / Financial / Real Estate / Sovereign Debt — 0 Comments
28
Sep 11

How Did We Get Here?

Karl Denninger makes a simple but telling point.  Since 1984 GDP growth has averaged 4% per year, debt growth has averaged 7% per year and government spending growth has also averaged 7% per year.  In no quarter did real economic growth exceed credit growth.   Europe Goes Enron (blog radio podcast).   Simply put, we are inflating credit faster than we are raising real economic output.  To repay debt, sufficient income must be generated to reduce this debt.  Thus, when the economy lags in a recession or depression, debt will go into default and must be either written off or restructured.

Also simply put, credit growth unsupported by income growth has distorted the economy.  In essence, the “easy money” fostered in a lax credit environment has sent the wrong signals to the real economy.  Some examples:

Real Estate

Lax bank lending and governmental programs encouraged homeowners to take on more debt.  The mantra was that house prices always rose. So bankers were eager to lend too much and borrowers were anxious to borrow too much, both believing that house price inflation would sustain the process.  Both parties ignored simple economic principles.  Incomes have been stagnating for more than ten years.  The housing boom expanded the supply of housing beyond demand.  Worse, the peripheral costs of owning a home (taxes, insurance, utilities and the like) ate into the income available to service those over-sized mortgages.   Loans were secured with little or no money down.

In the commercial real estate market, we massively overbuilt.   Again we mistakenly believed that inflation would bail out lenders and owners.   The demographic trend is for large companies to reduce use of commercial space.  Increasingly, employees work from home and technology requires fewer workers and less commercial space.  Internet shopping further lessens the need for brick and mortar retailers.  As with homes, the peripheral costs of commercial ownership kept rising.

Government

A falsely expanding, credit driven economy also sends false signals to government and their employees.   Tax receipts were on the rise from real estate transfer fees, expanding income taxes and capital gains from a rising stock market.    But these gains were bogus, a chimera.  And they did not benefit the average consumer.    Why shouldn’t the largesse of rising tax receipts be shared with employees, who also happen to be a powerful voting bloc?   Politicians were all too willing to grant pay increases, job security guarantees and costly pension and post-retirement benefits to government employees, especially those represented by powerful public unions.  Soon total compensation packages for public employees exceeded their private sector counterparts.

Sovereign Debt

And so the good times seemed to roll. What better way to finance government projects and even foreign wars than through inexpensive sovereign debt?  Dick Cheney once loudly proclaimed that “deficits don’t matter.”  Republicans and Democrats seemed to compete to see which party could run the largest deficits.  Believing that debt could be paid off through ever rising tax receipts, the government made more promises (like expanding Medicare coverage to include prescription drugs).   What were they thinking?  Borrow today and worry about repaying and credit collapse tomorrow?

Macro Trends

The credit binge occurred against a background of unfavorable macro economic trends.   First, US and European population growth, and therefore the supply of workers, slowed.  Second, free trade and free movement of capital and technology has exposed the American worker to foreign competition.  Seventy-dollar an hour (fully-loaded cost) Big Three unionized auto workers cannot compete with their Asian counterparts.   [Heritage Foundation study].  Third, technology has viciously cut into employment in the retailing, telecommunications, banking, insurance, travel and other industries.   Software programs now perform the job functions formerly executed by highly-paid skilled workers.  Fourth, zero interest policy has cut the income of savers and pension funds, impoverishing a class of consumers who supported the economy in the past.  Fifth, regulation is on the rise, increasing business operating costs.

The Debt Bubble

Thus, we have inflated a giant credit bubble without the resources to repay these debts. It is happening both here and in Europe.  Each government maneuver to save a bank (Bank of America) or a country (Greece) is merely an attempt to hide the real problem or shift it from private parties to taxpayers.  We undertook debt that we cannot repay.   We need to write off or restructure this debt, and yes, it will result in losses to the government and major financial institutions.  Restructuring could take the form of increasing the time to repay, reducing the interest rate or swapping equity for debt.  This outcome is unfortunately unpleasant but necessary.

Governments continue to conjure exotic, “cutting edge,” “outside the box” programs which merely delay the day of debt reckoning.   We borrowed too much and we now need to pay the piper.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark
American Society / Banking / Economics / Financial / International Finance — 0 Comments
19
Jul 11

Random Observations

What an exceedingly strange period in our economic and financial history!  Amidst a non-recovery economic recovery we have below par growth and high unemployment.  Coupled with economic weakness we have above trend inflation.  Let us consider some of the odder stories from last week:

Ben Bernanke and QE3

The first two exercises in quantitative easing have had mixed to negative consequences.   While the stock market has almost doubled from its low, the “real economy” has languished.   We can further document the relationship between QE and poor economic performance with a look at price hikes in key commodities such as food and energy.

Yet here is Dr. Ben Bernanke before Congress, once again selling us a product repair that simply does not work. On Wednesday, he made it clear that QE3 was part of his thinking. And even he is not altogether sure. On Wednesday, he backed away from an immediate move to start a third round of Fed money printing and bond buying.  See QE3 Guaranteed to Fail

Is there any reason that Dr. Bernanke still holds his job?  While his supporters point to a rise in stocks, the “real economy” has suffered.  Aren’t there better candidates for his job, who will try some new ideas? Are money printing and market manipulation the only ideas that any of our leaders can come up with? And to further the irritation with our Princeton economic guru, note that stocks used to rise and fall on company earnings and the economic outlook, not on which side of the bed the Fed chairman woke up on.

Don’t Worry Be Happy: Just Disregard Europe’s Problems  

David Goldman in Inner Workings points out that the financial crisis in Europe will not be a rerun of Lehman’s 2008 meltdown:

Under the headline “A Fate Worse Than Banking Crisis” my friend John Dizard at the Financial Times points out that any run on Europe’s banks would be instantly countered by swap lines from the Fed and ECB. His point (one I have been making for some time) is that the scope of the European banking problem is well known and that mechanisms have long been in place to deal with the worst-case scenario. Not so with Lehman, where a sort of China syndrome applied: no-one knew the amount of contingent liabilities that might be affected. See Once Again: It’s Not Lehman II

Mr. Goldman continues to calmly assure us that European problems will not create another financial meltdown:

My conclusion: there is no reason to panic over the present kerfluffle, but there is no reason to own any exposure to southern Europe. Ever again.  See Hopeless, But Not Serious: Once Again.

It’s too early to blow the “all clear” whistle on capital markets, but today’s recovery in the major US stock indices reassures me that this is not another financial crisis on the September 2008 scale, just a particularly nasty negotiation after which Italians, Greeks and Spaniards will end up poorer (along with Minnesota teachers, Wisconsin firemen and New Jersey policemen). It was amusing to see the usual suspects among the Street strategists issue dire warnings about increased tail risk just as markets turned around. See Ken Lewis, George Soros and Other Hedgehogs

So Mr. Goldman is assuring us of financial recovery based on one day of a US stock market rally?  His prognostications eerily remind me of 2007 and the assurances from Ben Bernanke, Hank Paulson and other financial luminaries that the subprime crisis was well contained.  Stock markets rallied then too, only to decline disastrously a year later.

Yesterday was a stark reminder of how unsafe Europe really is:

Greece 2 year interest rate on sovereign date: 34.5%
Portugal 2 year:  21.2%
Ireland 2 year : 23.3%
Italy 2 year : 4.65%
Spain 2 year:  4.55%

America is only marginally safer than Europe.   American research firm Egan-Jones recently also downgraded US Treasury debt.  See Europe is *Not* “Safe”

Are We Better Off Now Than In 2008?

We live in a financially interconnected world, and I am not at all reassured by Mr. Goldman.  I doubt that anyone knows what the effect of a bankruptcy in Portugal or Italy would have on world financial markets.   Could anyone have predicted that the 2008 financial crisis would take down AIG and Lehman and send US banks scurrying to the Treasury for TARP funds?  Do we think the world and the major financial institutions can better weather a storm now than in 2008?  While I may not know, I am more fearful that Bernanke, Goldman, Dimon and Blankfein do not know either, and they are out there making predictions and advocating policy.

Europe, China and the US have spent trillions of dollars trying to bolster their economies.  What if we have used all our money-printing ammunition and the next crisis is even worse?

 

 

 

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark
American Society / Economics / Municipal Finance / Pensions / Political / State Finance — 0 Comments
11
Aug 10

Awash in Legacy Costs

Legacy costs have strangled many American iconic and venerable American industrial firms.  The automobile and steel companies are recent victims of this growing scenario:  diminishing work force and profits supporting large and growing pension and retiree medical costs.  In many instances bankruptcy has been the corporation’s only way out.

The Financial Dictionary defines legacy costs in the private sector as follows:

Ongoing costs to a company that come from funding activities that, by definition, do not increase revenue. Perhaps the most prominent example of legacy costs is the funding of pension plans. Legacy costs often accrue when a company takes on too many responsibilities in times of strong performance or when it takes on an appropriate level of responsibility and then its priorities change.

Legacy costs also include retiree medical, life insurance and other promised benefits.

The recent turmoil in the financial markets has revealed a potentially larger legacy problem.  Not only is private industry suffering this stranglehold; legacy costs are also drowning state budgets in red ink. Like private business, the public sector is also saddled with pension, retiree medical and life insurance benefits.   Completing the analogy, many of these costs were taken on when state tax revenues (think profits) were high.  Politicians avoided confronting public employees and unions and chose the path of least resistance; that is, they capitulated to exorbitant demands.  Then they compounded the problem:  instead of direct layoffs, states resorted to early retirement pension sweeteners, which depleted pension assets.

The Current Status of Public Pension Plans and Other Benefits

On August 6th, the New York Times reported the massive underfunding of public pensions.  See Battle Looms over Huge Cost of Public Pensions. The Times discovered a February Pew Center for States study showing a $1 trillion pension underfunding. (We could have a whole different post as to why it took until August for the Times to report a study published in February.)   Worse yet, the Pew study may have been overly optimistic.  In other words, their methodology understated the liability and the deficit.  In contrast, the National Center for Policy Analysis’ Unfunded Liabilities of State and Government Employee Retirement Benefit Plans found that states were using too high a discount rate to determine employee liabilities.  Under the National Center for Policy Analysis deficits are far more alarming:

  • Unfunded liabilities for health and other benefits are
    $558 billion, compared to the reported $537 billion.
  • Thus, total unfunded liabilities for all benefit plans are an
    estimated $
  • Unfunded pension liabilities are approximately $2.5
    trillion, compared to the reported amount of $493 billion.
  • 3.1 trillion — nearly three times higher than
    the plans report. See Reality Beckons (Government Pensions)

While pensions are funded, other benefits like retiree medical, vision and dental have no assets side aside to fund them.  Moreover, based on current trends, medical costs are growing exponentially.

The New Battle Ground

Colorado undertook modest changes to its pension plans to lower future pension payments. The state legislature reduced its cost of living adjustment cap from 3.5% to 2%. The result was an immediate lawsuit from public employees:

Earlier this year, in an act of rare political courage, a bipartisan coalition of state legislators passed a pension overhaul bill. Among other things, the bill reduced the raise that people who are already retired get in their pension checks each year.

This sort of thing just isn’t done. States have asked current workers to contribute more, tweaked the formula for future hires or banned them from the pension plan altogether. But this was apparently the first time that state legislators had forced current retirees to share the pain.

Sharing the burden seems to be the obvious solution so we don’t continue to kick the problem into the future. See Battle Looms over Huge Cost of Public Pensions

Employees view their pensions as inviolable contracts, while the state is invoking changes as actuarial necessities.

Who Thinks About the Taxpayers?

Taxpayers are facing unemployment, the risk of losing their jobs and increasing costs of education, medical and energy.   Public employees are well paid, largely insulated against layoffs, and receive top of the line current and retiree benefit packages.  Barron’s points out that: “[m]ost public employees, if they hang around to retirement, can count on pensions equal to 75% to 90% of their pay in their highest-earning years.”  The $2 Trillion Hole.  Frequently, supervisors and employees collude to inflate final pay with shift and overtime pay in the last year of work.  Current and retiree medical benefits require minimum or no contribution.

In contrast, private sector benefit plans pale in generosity to public benefit plans.  I worked for a company for 32 years and my pension is a little more than 40% of my last five years of pay.  Retiree medical requires a 20% contribution.   Our plans had no cost of living adjustments.   My company’s plans were probably in the top 5% of benefit plans in America.   Most companies offer little more than a basic medical plan and no retiree benefits.

The federal government will soon run out of borrowing capacity.  In addition, there are questions of federalism; that is, the states are supposed to be responsible for their own finances.   Federal and state legislators and public unions  have to be far more realistic than they have been.  If they are not,  some of our largest states (think New York, New Jersey, California, Illinois) will suffer as did  GM and  Greece:  drowning in legacy costs.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark
American Society / Economics / Financial / International Finance / Municipal Finance / Political / State Finance — 0 Comments
10
Jun 10

Bailout Nation Lives

Where is the coordination of economic policy among the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and Congress?  In testimony before Congress, Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve warned against large budget deficits:

The Fed chief repeated his call for lawmakers to come up with a long-term plan to reduce the federal budget deficit, which is projected to widen to a record $1.55 trillion this fiscal year. “Unless we as a nation make a strong commitment to fiscal responsibility, in the longer run, we will have neither financial stability nor healthy economic growth,” he said.  See Bernanke Says Fed Prepared to Counter Effects of Europe Crisis

It is clear that bailouts are not consistent with fiscal responsibility.  But it seems the Administration and Congress are tone deaf to these no more bailout pleas.

No Constituency Left Behind

We have analyzed the bailout actions of the Bush and Obama administrations. See Are We a Socialist Country? It has been a long and undistinguished progression from Bear Stearns, AIG, American Express, GM, Chrysler, GE and others.  We have collectively decided that banks, insurance, automotive, industrial, credit card and other companies are too systemically important to fail, and are therefore bailout worthy.

Despite all protestation the Obama Administration appears to be on a constant search for new bailout candidates:

-          A $23B Bailout for Teachers – Education Secretary Arne Duncan urged Congress to support a $23b jobs bill to prevent teacher layoffs.

-          Why Leave Out Pension Funds? – Senator Casey, D-PA proposes affording two large multi-employer Teamster pension plans federal protection.  The estimated cost would be $8-10b.

-          US Largesse Goes Global – Through IMF membership, the US taxpayer will be funding the bailout of Greece and other European nations. IMF Chairman Boutros-Ghali pointed out the perilous financial position of the IMF and the need for more member capital contributions.  Rep. McMorris Rodgers, R-CA highlights the hidden cost to us:

“This should give pause to Treasury Secretary Geithner and others who boasted that the IMF’s bailout bonanza wouldn’t cost U.S. taxpayers a dime,” said Rep. McMorris Rodgers.  “In truth, the cost to U.S. taxpayers goes up every few weeks.  After the Greek bailout, it stood at about $7 billion; after the EU bailout, it stood at about $60 billion.  Now – based on Mr. Boutros-Ghali’s comments – we’re talking at possibly $100 billion or more.  This has got to stop.” See Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers Responds to IMF Statement Europe Bailout will Cost  US Taxpayers 100 billion+

-          As we have pointed out, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are uncapped, growing, perpetual bailouts. See Shredding the Social Fabric.

The Hidden Costs of Bailouts

Politicians are constantly on the prowl for a free lunch.  Bailouts and promises of “little cost to the taxpayer” provide that seemingly free repast.  A closer look at the bailout phenomenon shows us its high and hidden price tag.  A look at some unintended consequences:

  • Bailouts only add to the burgeoning federal deficit.
  • Ultimately, they will be paid for either through higher taxes, higher inflation or both.
  • We are eroding financial discipline.  GM was roundly criticized for giving away a new Corvette to a Detroit Tiger, who pitched a near perfect game.
  • Likewise, we are eroding fiscal discipline in states and municipalities, which should be cutting budgets and raising taxes rather than seeking bailouts.
  • We are compromising our most basic federal system of separation of powers, as a state and local function, education, becomes a federal ward.
  • We are encouraging moral hazard with reckless and profligate behavior (and prudent behavior is punished).
  • Bailouts beget other bailouts, as it become impossible to draw the line when future constituencies come to Washington for their bailout.
  • Today’s funding of bailouts limits the flexibility of the Administration to respond to future, more serious crises.

Fundamentally, bailouts are unfair, as one group is leveraging its political clout to earn a bailout at the expense of innocent taxpayers.  Rewarding the profligate and the irresponsible makes little sense as public policy.  It is time to end the bailouts.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark
American Society / Banking / Executive Compensatio / Financial / Political — 0 Comments
19
Feb 10

A Reputation as Good as Goldman Part II

In A Reputation as Good as Goldman Part I, we examined Goldman’s role in exacerbating the housing market collapse, AIG’s demise, and the Greek government debt crisis.  These major stories were the subject of separate front page articles in the New York Times. Mentors had always warned me no to be too clever by half, a lesson Goldman perhaps missed.   Are the Goldman stories symptomatic of behavior for the last ten years on Wall Street?  Was this always the way Wall Street firms and Goldman behaved?

Sydney Weinberg

In 1930, Sydney Weinberg became the head of Goldman Sachs. He ran the firm for the next 39 years.  By 2010 standards, he was an unlikely person for the job. He had left school at 15 (1907) and started at the struggling brokerage firm as a janitor’s assistant.  He then served in the Navy during World War I, returned to the firm and ultimately became co-head of the securities trading group. He is credited with saving Goldman Sachs from bankruptcy during the Depression. See Annals of Business: The Uses of Adversity by Malcolm Gladwell

In 1956, Weinberg managed his greatest corporate coup. Goldman Sachs was selected to handle for the Ford Motor Company the enormously difficult, largest ever until that time, initial public offering.  The effort took two years. The most fascinating part of the transaction was Weinberg’s fee:

When Henry Ford had asked Weinberg at the outset what his fee would be, Weinberg had declined to get specific; he offered to work for a dollar a year until everything was over and then let the family decide what his efforts were really worth.  Far more than the actual fee, Weinberg always said he appreciated an affectionate, handwritten letter he received from Ford which says, along with other flattering things, “Without you, it could not have been accomplished.” Weinberg had the letter framed and hung in his office, where he would proudly direct visitors’ attention to it, saying: “That’s the big payoff as far as I am concerned…” The fee finally paid was estimated at the time to be as high as a million dollars. The actual fee was nowhere near that amount: For two years’ work and a dazzling success, the indispensable man was paid only $250,000. Deeply disappointed, Sidney Weinberg never mentioned the amount.  See The Partnership: The Making of Goldman Sachs by Charles D. Ellis.

Weinberg understood the value of a continuing relationship with Ford Motor Company and was soon appointed to their board.  Moreover, for nearly a half century, Goldman became the chief investment bank for Ford which vaulted the firm into the top tier of Wall Street firms.  To Sydney Weinberg reputation was everything.

Tradition and the Making of a Culture

John Weinberg followed his father Sidney as head of the firm.  The younger Weinberg preserved his father’s ethic and corporate culture.

Once upon a time, Goldman Sachs shunned publicity.  During the period from 1930 to 1969, Sydney Weinberg ran Goldman Sachs where he developed a staunch corporate cultural aversion to publicity.  During the 1970s, a tandem of John Weinberg and John Whitehead assumed the reigns of leadership at Goldman Sachs.  Whitehead left the company in 1984 to enter public life.  John Weinberg carried on in the same vein as his father Sydney – shunning publicity – to the point where he hired a man to keep his name and his firm’s out of the press.  He kept him off the full-time payroll (though he sat full-time at a desk in head office) so that if, improbably, a comment did slip out, it could be honestly dismissed as not coming from a Goldman Sachs employee.  John Weinberg served as sole senior partner and chairman until 1990.  His mantra was to put the client’s interests first and he wouldn’t allow Goldman to be involved in (sic) hostile takeovers. See All Roads Lead to Goldman Sachs.

As a young law student, Ben Stein interviewed with John Weinberg.  He was impressed with Weinberg as a “smart guy,” but also surmised that he inherited the position from his father, Sydney Weinberg:

But what I did not know about John Weinberg was that even though he was rich and well connected, as a young man he joined the Marines to fight the Japanese in the Pacific, then fought again in Korea. That was America’s ruling class then. The scions of the rich went off to fight. See Looking for the Will Beyond the Battlefield

Clearly, John Weinberg believed that honor and service to one’s country mattered.  But in the current Goldman and Wall Street culture, going off to serve one’s country is for the common folk: why do that and miss out on so many deals and great bonuses?

What Changed?

The end of the Weinbergs’ era can be traced to several factors.  First, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and other large investment firms were partnerships.  This means the partners were investing their personal fortunes.  Moreover, retained capital was extremely important to the future success of the business.  Thus, there was a limit on executive compensation based on capital and personal preservation.  Second, as firms went public, it was easier to convince a less involved board of directors (rather than partners) to pay large bonuses to executives. Third, those same executives became increasingly greedy, and probed and trampled ethical boundaries. Short-term thinking reigned on Wall Street.  Fourth, compliant government officials endorsed and enabled these behaviors instead of regulating them.

Finally, we need to look at the important intersection of law and ethics.  Just because something is legal does not mean one should do it.  A legal thing is not always an ethical thing.  Would the Weinbergs’ have permitted Goldman to take positions against their own clients?   Would they have forced AIG into insolvency? Would they have designed scams to fool the EU? I doubt it.

It will be a long time before Goldman restores its reputation.  And President Obama is not catalyzing any restoration of ethics or reputation by calling the current Goldman CEO a savvy businessman.   By its actions, I doubt if Goldman Sachs cares.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark
American Society / Banking / Financial / Political / Regulation — 0 Comments
18
Feb 10

A Reputation as Good as Goldman? Part I

Part I of II in a series. Part II here.

“It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.”

Warren Buffett

Arguably the greatest living investor, Warren Buffet, clearly valued a person’s or an organization’s reputation.   In 2008 Buffet was the “white knight” investor for a struggling Goldman Sachs, investing $5b in the firm.  A mentor of mine had wise complementary counsel to Buffet’s:  when providing legal advice, be sure that you would be comfortable if that advice were to appear in a New York Times, Washington Post or Wall Street Journal front page article.

We live in  an age of greed, and indeed supreme irony.   Perhaps Mr. Buffet never shared his wise advice with the senior management of Goldman Sachs.  Worse, maybe he did and they ignored him.  In any event, how has Goldman’s reputation fared?  Let’s examine three separate front page New York Times articles.

Banks Bundled Bad Debt, Bet Against It And Won (NY Times, December 24, 2009)

Goldman Sachs sold mortgage-backed debt securities to pension funds and insurance companies. To hedge their position and to profit from a decline in the housing market, Goldman created a synthetic derivative security called Abacus. This second security was a direct bet against the position of their institutional clients. The mortgage-backed debt securities sold to the institutional clients performed poorly, with losses in the billions. Some of the original securities were of such poor quality that losses occurred within months of issue. Goldman created these synthetic securities well in excess of any hedging needs, permitting it to profit handsomely at the expense of its institutional clients.  The obvious ethical problem was succinctly stated:

“The simultaneous selling of securities to customers and shorting them because they believed they were going to default is the most cynical use of credit information that I have ever seen,” said Sylvain R. Raynes, an expert in structured finance at R & R Consulting in New York. “When you buy protection against an event that you have a hand in causing, you are buying fire insurance on someone else’s house and then committing arson.”

The SEC and other governmental agencies are investigating Goldman and other firms to determine whether or not they violated “fair dealing” rules.

Testy Conflict with Goldman Helped Push A.I.G. to Edge (NY Times, February 7, 2010)

AIG insured some of Goldman’s complex mortgage securities.  When the housing crisis deepened, AIG paid Goldman $2b to cover potential losses. AIG later asserted that Goldman had inflated the potential losses and sought monies back. Goldman countered that it was due even more money.  The SEC is now looking into whether or not Goldman’s demands for loss coverage depressed the mortgage market and hastened AIG’s demise.

In another supreme irony, after the government took over AIG, Goldman received an additional $12.9b from taxpayers, one hundred percent of expected losses.

Wall St. Helped to Mask Debt Fueling Europe’s Crisis (NY Times, February 14, 2010)

Goldman’s questionable financial maneuvers were not confined to the United States.

As worries over Greece rattle world markets, records and interviews show that with Wall Street’s help, the nation engaged in a decade-long effort to skirt European debt limits. One deal created by Goldman Sachs helped obscure billions in debt from the budget overseers in Brussels.

Even as the crisis was nearing the flashpoint, banks were searching for ways to help Greece forestall the day of reckoning. In early November — three months before Athens became the epicenter of global financial anxiety — a team from Goldman Sachs arrived in the ancient city with a very modern proposition for a government struggling to pay its bills, according to two people who were briefed on the meeting.

The bankers, led by Goldman’s president, Gary D. Cohn, held out a financing instrument that would have pushed debt from Greece’s health care system far into the future, much as when strapped homeowners take out second mortgages to pay off their credit cards.

European authorities are looking into the role of Goldman and others in skirting EU rules.

Is There Another Way?

Has the American public been lulled into believing that this is an acceptable way of doing business, or do we require the people involved to be publicly excoriated, tried, convicted and jailed before we acknowledge their tactics were shabby?  Is Goldman Sachs an institution now synonymous with crafty machinations and greedy outcomes? Are its tactics symptomatic of a Wall Street “disease?”  Is there an alternative way of doing things?  Does reputation matter?  Part II will examine these issues and possibilities.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark
Banking / Business / Economics / Financial / International Finance / Political — 0 Comments
16
Feb 10

Where Are We Now?

“Where Are We Now?” is my fiftieth blog post.  The purpose of a political and economic blog is to “connect the dots” looking for coherent patterns.  This post will attempt to do just that, warning you that the emerging pattern is disturbing.

Slow Motion Depressions

Policy makers in Washington and other western capitals are recently smug. They proclaim that, through coordinated monetary and fiscal response, we have averted the Second Great Depression.  More bluntly, all we have done is throw a lot of money at the problem through unprecedented monetary easing and a fiscal policy of bailouts and stimulus bills.  The core financial issue remains:  western countries and the US in particular have too much debt and insufficient income to service that debt.  Depressions have their own timetable. In my opinion, government intervention has only slowed the timetable, but definitely has not averted the event.

The Magic Act

Politicians and central bankers are a bit like magicians.  While an observer is firmly focused on the right hand we miss the left hand’s activities, which are hiding in plain sight.   Just look at current economic and financial trends:

  • Increasing Risk of Sovereign Debt Default – In late 2009 a problem arose with the financial solvency of Dubai.  Much like the subprime crisis in the US, financial pundits assured the public that the Dubai default was minor and self contained.  Yesterday, credit protection for Dubai rose to a record high exceeding the November peak. See Dubai CDS Hits 652, Ploughs Through November Highs As Gold Jumps.   Greece too is on the verge of sovereign debt default and is seeking a European Union bailout.  Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain are reportedly in dire financial trouble as well.  The United States, Japan and United Kingdom are not immune from talk of default.
  • Crisis at the State Level – The Center for Budget and Politics has projected 48 of 50 states will have budget deficits.  Cumulatively, the Center estimates an $180b shortfall for this fiscal year.  All states with the exception of Vermont have a balanced budget requirement.  Some assistance to the states has been proffered through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, but it is questionable whether this aid can continue. See Recession Continues to Batter State Budgets; State Responses Could Slow Recovery. It is more likely that states will follow the lead of newly elected Republican Governor Chris Christie.  Recognizing that the state is on the edge of bankruptcy, Christie has declared a fiscal “state of emergency” and intends to slash $2.2b from the budget. See Chris Christie Declares Fiscal ‘State of Emergency,’ Paving Way for NJ Spending Cuts. The crisis in municipal finance portends trouble in the municipal bond markets.  The unsuspecting public has purchased municipals in search of yield and instead may receive an unpleasant surprise.
  • National Fiscal Irresponsibility – President Obama signed into law a $1.9t increase in the debt ceiling, raising it to $14.2t. As the administration has predicted deficits out to 2020, this ceiling will rise each and every year. Also, it does not include the Christmas Eve bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which provided “unlimited financial assistance” to these two entities. We will likely exceed our previous limit of $400b on financial assistance under emergency bailout provisions.  See US Promises Unlimited Financial Assistance to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Moreover, how can we continue to finance these deficits without an increase in interest rates?  However, such an increase in interest rates could put the US in a “doom loop,” as interest payments become the dominant budget line item crowding out other federal spending programs.
  • China – Recently China has made a number of financial moves that do not bode well for the US and world economy. First, China has ordered its currency managers to withdraw from any US dollar denominated risk assets, such as corporate bonds, equities and only invest in US guaranteed assets.  Second, it has raised its reserve requirements on its own banks to dampen an over-inflated domestic real estate market.   Speculation in Chinese real estate has reached the point that Jim Chanos, a respected investor, predicts an economic collapse.  See Jim Chanos: China Bubble Ready to Burst. Given the size of our deficits, the US desperately needs China to continue purchasing US government securities. The world needs China as a growth engine to continue world trade and prevent a second leg of the recession.

Harbingers of the Economic Unraveling

Before the next phase of an economic crisis there are often clues to impending problems. Some harbingers to consider:

  • Junk Bonds – The Greek crisis has spurred investors to sell junk bonds, highly risky assets, at the fastest rate since 2005.  As a result credit spreads are widening between treasury and higher risk corporate bonds. See Junk Bond Spreads Widening: A Canary in the Coal Mine.
  • Problems in a Treasury Auction – Last week’s US 30-year Treasury bond auction was considered a failure.  Indirect bids, that is, foreign buyers, dried up and the government had to offer a yield of 4.72% compared to an expected yield of 4.687%.  See Dismal $16b 30 Year Auction
  • Credit Card Problems – Capital One, a major credit card issuer, reports that in January delinquencies rose and that expected unrecoverable loans have risen to 10.41% from 10.14% in December. See Capital One: Credit -Card Delinquencies Rose in January.
  • State and Municipal Finance –In its upcoming July 1 fiscal year budget, California expects a $20b shortfall.  Illinois has a $61b pension shortfall, and is borrowing to make contributions.   Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, is contemplating a March 1 bankruptcy filing.  These stories are the proverbial tip of the municipal finance debt iceberg. See Illinois Pension Fund $61b Underwater; State Borrows Money for 2010 Contribution; California $20b in the Hole Again.

Reality

Till now the policy direction of the Obama administration and other western leaders has been to “extend and pretend:”  we will ignore economic realities by permitting banks to suspend “mark to market accounting” and we will send various administration spokesmen to spread the fairy dust of “green shoots” to pacify an anxious public.  Essentially, we have an economic policy of faith and hope that willfully ignores reality.  Economics does respond to the laws of mathematics.  Like a termite that silently eats away the wooden supports of a house, excessive debt has eaten away the structure of the world economy.  There will be more troubled countries like Dubai and states like California before this Depression has run its course.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark