|
The House of Representatives voted 'no' on a $700 billion bailout yesterday
and investors reacted by punishing U.S. equities for an estimated $1.2 trillion
loss. If you were to ask the average person this morning if purchasing $700
billion in toxic securities to immediately generate $1.2 trillion in stock
market wealth sounded like a good idea, many would probably respond 'yes'.
This hypothetical aptly demonstrates the mass myth that has been engrained
in nearly everyone's psyche over the last two decades - that something, at
least on paper, can be produced from nothing...
To begin with, the two key problems with the U.S. financial markets are that
they are too large (in relation to both the real economy and common sense),
and that they are highly unregulated. Thus, the proposed solution of getting
these markets growing again via massive bailout projects is wrongheaded. If
you want to avoid the prospect of systemic failure in the future the U.S. markets,
specifically the vastly secretive and interconnected derivatives markets, need
to be downsized dramatically. This process has slowly been occurring over the
last year but has been seriously stymied by repeated attempts to bail the system
out. Had a more concerted effort by policy makers early on in this crisis been
to forewarn financial market participants that increased transparency and deleveraging
were the orders of the day, perhaps we would not have the *quandary we have
today.
Next, the problem with the U.S. economy is that it is based upon unsustainable
borrowing/debt/asset price manifestations. To highlight the most obvious example,
the U.S. consumer saves very little, has a seemingly ever increasing debt profile
and, more recently, has relied greatly upon historic stock market and housing
market bubbles to keep their wealth expectations abnormally high. In any and
every sense, the U.S. consumer is in deep trouble if no major asset class is
appreciating on paper or if credit is not becoming more readily available.
As for the U.S. government, if studied according to GAAP their balance sheet
makes the worst U.S. bank balance sheet look pristine.
Generally speaking, America's current problems started with the closing of
the gold window, progressed with the unsustainably of Bretton Woods II, and
reached the point of insanity via the complete lack of regulatory oversight
that epitomized the Greenspan years. That U.S. financial markets are in a state
of panic today is not surprising. That the powers that be have been able to
keep the game going this long is.
* The Quandary That Has No Good Answer
While adjustments are required to place the U.S. on a more sustainable trajectory,
it is impossible to know whether or not such adjustments would be more beneficial
if levied over a period of weeks, months, or years. To use the case of the
U.S. housing market and/or the assets related to this market, the answer from
policy makers is clearly to string the downward adjustments out over many years.
If you ignore the potentially deleterious costs associated with enacting this
vision, this plan of attack is promising. After all, the negative feedback
loop from crashing home prices and the complete seizure of lending/banking
that could result is undesirable, to say the least.
As ridiculous as the opposite notion may sound, perhaps it is better to simply
tear it down and start all over again? What should be noted in humoring this
theory is that the U.S. economy is still the largest in the world, U.S. debt
is denominated in U.S. dollars, and there is currently no serious competitor
to USD hegemony. In other words, there remains the possibility that should
an 'end game' crisis develop - even if its ignition point was in the U.S. -
that the U.S. could play the key role in mapping out tomorrow's new financial
order (as an aside, one can only imagine the unmitigated disaster that would
be transpiring in the flawed U.S. system if it wasn't such a key player in
the global economy today).
Suffice to say, no one denies that financial market adjustments are needed;
that greater transparency, less interconnectivity, and smaller derivatives
nonsense must come to pass. The quandary is how do you achieve these adjustments
if less transparency and a singular connector (i.e. government owns all) are
your policy choices? Likewise, it can not be denied that economic adjustments
are required; that less reliance on foreign capital and more sustainable consumer/government
balance sheet trends are desirable. The quandary here is that even greater
reliance on foreign capital is thought to be required over the short term to
fund outlays, and the U.S. consumer must keep borrowing/spending so that the
U.S. avoids severe recession.
So Many Quandaries So Little Time
While a $700 billion bailout package could well equal a $1.2 trillion increase
in stock market wealth, it should be remembered that these numbers say nothing
of the value of the dollar compared to goods and services. Following yesterday's
'no' vote the U.S. dollar firmed against many of the majors. Perhaps on the
next successful bailout day it declines. And perhaps longer-term if
preserving the flawed U.S. financial and economic model are the underlying
intent of today's policy efforts, the U.S. dollar fails. How many widgets does
$1.2 trillion of dollars in USD stock market wealth purchase?
Adding the dollar quandary to the host of other quandaries dotting the financial
escarpment inundates the brain. The human mind, as profound as it is, can not
synthesize the most preferred scenarios or concisely map out the desired causal
relationships with the quandary-fog layered so thick. So, with common sense
beaten senseless the reversion process begins and 20+ years of fond memories
flood the sensors tied to emotional responders: scream for the bailout now!
Do something else later. Try to forget that a diet consisting of just ice cream
eventually produces health problems.
|