|
This post draws on a few previous ones. We'll comment on several news items
from this week as manifestations of the dominant impact of global speculative
finance. They are Goldman Sachs record profits and the record U.S. current
account deficit, sharply mounting scientific evidence of much more rapid than
expected climate change, and the Enron trial.
On Tuesday, March 14, Goldman Sachs reported better-than-expected first-quarter
of $2.5 billion, up 62%. According to Reuters, "record trading revenue, accompanied
by one of the busiest periods for mergers and acquisitions ever, resulted in
record revenue and earnings." A portolio manager was quoted as saying, "There
were a lot of good things in currencies, in commodities and many credit products.
Goldman also has the greatest presence in non-U.S. markets and those markets
are growing exceptionally fast."
On the same day, Bloomberg reported that "the U.S. current account deficit
widened more than forecast to a record $224.9 billion in the fourth quarter,
driven by a ballooning trade gap that is poised to worsen this year....For
all of 2005, the deficit reached $804.9 billion, the biggest ever...[it] equaled
7 percent of the nation's gross domestic product in the fourth quarter and
6.5 percent of GDP for all 2005, both all-time highs. The deficit set a record
in seven of the last eight years."
The juxtaposition of Goldman Sachs reporting record-breaking profits on the
same day that the U.S. Commerce Dept. reported record-breaking current account
deficits is a good indication of who benefits most from the current global
speculative finance system.
This is the end-result of a critical choice made by the financial markets
in the 1980s. At that time, the issue was how to compete against manufacturing
trade competition from Japan, Germany, etc. (See my 2/10 "Bush's American Competitiveness
and Advanced Energy Initiatives: "Deja Vu All Over Again" Twenty-five Years
Too Late?" link)
Eventually, corporate America, strongly influenced, via the CEO stock option
linkage, by the short-term preferences of its speculative capital markets,
chose to outsource, and U.S. economic policy emphasized seeking free global
capital markets for its financial giants being spoon-fed liquidity steroids
by Greenspan's Fed and later also the Bank of Japan.
The corporate and policy shifts away from manufacturing competitiveness to
an emphasis on unfettered globalized speculative finance enabled the U.S.,
with its highly vaunted advantages in flexibility, especially its ability to
implement wholesale layoffs without corporate consequences, to "wrong-foot" the
manufacturing-oriented, more socially consensual Japanese and German economies,
which also were hurt by the bursting of a huge bubble in the former and the
enormous costs of the re-unification with East Germany in the latter.
The relatively dismal performace of its main competitors combined with technology
innovations in the U.S. gave a large comparative advantage to U.S. "free market" speculative
finance, which then resulted in two huge booms/bubbles, in tech in the late
1990s and currently in real estate, in the process sucking in the "global savings
glut" (Bernanke's term, which is actually a reflection of poor financial intermediation,
corporate governance and social safety nets in many countries, not excess savings
per se), initially attracted by high U.S. returns and later continued by policy
decisions by central banks.
After the collapse of the TMT equity bubble in 2000-02, the long-term stagnation
of real wages and mediocre employment growth in the early phases of the recovery
may have started to become more politically difficult. But Greenspan managed
to keep the economy reflated barely skipping a beat with his negative real
interest rate policy supporting a global real estate/consumer spending boom
(aided by the Bank of Japan's zero interest rate "quantitative easing"), while
public attention was re-focused from corporate "bad apples" to foreign enemies
in a permanent war setting.
The problem with this "solution" is that it has just put the U.S. deeper in
debt, while lowering its standing abroad, and, importantly, greatly distracting
it from focusing on the real solutions to its real problems.
The end-result was reported Tuesday, Goldman Sachs and key financial players
making huge profits at the same that the U.S. sinks further into debt to foreigners,
while the de-industrialization of America has led to worker average real earnings
that have been stagnant the past five years and are down 17% since 1972 (Table
B-47, pg 338, "2006 Economic Report of the President, link).
This situation continues to increase political pressure on China to redress
the effects of fateful U.S. mis-allocation of its resources away from advanced
high-tech manufacting into speculative finance, enormously benefitting the
very few in the financial elite, with Wal-Mart temp jobs with no benefits for
the rest.
Another manifestation the dominance of the global speculative finance is increasing
evidence that global climate change is occurring more rapidly than previously
modeled. Here are some of the headlines from the maintsream press reporting
new scientific studies in just the past month:
March 14, "Climate change 'irreversible' as Arctic sea ice fails to re-form;" March
14, ""Global warming gases at highest levels ever: UN;" March 3, ""Antarctic
ice sheet decline startles scientists: Losses contradict earlier climate forecast;" March
3, ""Antarctica Cannot Replace Ice Loss: Study finds continent is shrinking
faster than it can grow. Experts say changes to the global water cycle could
hasten the pace of sea-level rise;" Feb 17, "Ice Dumped by Greenland's Glaciers
Triples in 10 Years: Scientists say 'wake-up call' study indicates that sea
level could climb even more quickly than current projections;" March 10, "Bering
Sea Climate Is Shifting: Scientists say sea life is fighting to survive as
the water warms up and ice melts sooner. The changes are profound and may be
irreversible;" March 6, "Global warming evidence grows -U.N. expert."
Global warming is not just about science and politics, as the mainstream media
usually reports. The heart of the problem is actually economic.
The globalized speculative finance system avoids paying the true economic
costs of global production and development, relegating these to unaccounted
for "externalities." These unpaid costs manifest themselves in climate change,
environmental degradation, underinvestment in sustainable energy, stagnant
real wages, attacks on benefits and pensions, substandard education, shortage
of clean water, widespread malnutrition, inadequate health care, famines, exposure
to natural disasters, etc., etc., etc.
The real costs of infrastructure and technology development, etc. are just
being passed off onto future generations right now in a manic chase after the
quick buck. This is not economically sustainable in the long run, and it is
also morally wrong.
This is how I put it in my 2/11/06 "The Global Speculative Financial System
as "Enabler" of America's Addiction to Oil": link
"A fundamental problem of the global speculative financial system is that
it is extremely heavily skewed in favor of seeking ultra-high short-term "paper" capital
gains, usually through quick gimmicks and essentially using private "insider" knowledge,
ultimately at the public's expense...."
"I.e., the hedge funds [now up to $1.5 trillion in assets] and proprietary
trading desks [of Goldman, Citigroup, etc.] can make huge profits from overly
leveraged trades in the explosively growing, very opaque private credit and
derivatives markets (the latter now $300-400 trillion in notional value) because
they have an implicit public guarantee of insurance via liquidity provision
from the central banks should their trading models ever prove wrong.
"And the private equity firms, who also use leverage, and venture capitalists
essentially arbitrage off their private knowledge as insiders to take advantage
of the mispriced valuations in the heavily regulated public securities markets."
"Little of this highly speculative, unrelenting chase after the very big quick
buck is ultimately fair and honest, nor is it economically productive and viable,
relatively short-term appearances to the contrary."
"Rather, it greatly distorts the global market allocation of resources, since
it results in the massive under-funding of basic, long-term projects that are
the foundation for generating real wealth, but which can't compete for capital
allocation against short-term speculative capital gains offering much higher
returns. Speculative finance capital, aka hot money from all sorts of unregulated
private funds, is replacing sound productive long-term investments."
Finally, there is the ongoing Enron trial.
The real problem running through all the corporate scandals of 2001-02, which
the mass media never got right despite the huge coverage, was, and still is,
that corporate America, through the direct link via CEO stock options to actions
to maximize short-term shareholder value, for many years now has been explicitly
governed to slavishly respond to the grossly distorted market price signals
and profit incentives created by global speculative financial markets.
This very close corporate governance-global capital markets link might be
fine if the latter were operating properly. But they are not, they are clearly
very overly speculative, hence they are misallocating real activity and real
resources in the real economy via the distorted financial signals that the
corporate CEOs are responding to.
The TMT equity bubble of the late 1990s essentially caused the corporate governance
scandals, not the other way around. If the banks, venture capitalists and Greenspan
had taken away the bubble, which they were not incentivized to do (the financial
system has no real anchor), then that would have had the effect of also removing
the distorted market incentives that led to the corporate scandals.
In Enron's case, it was no surprise, in fact it was almost inevitable, that
bubble's perverted market incentives (which culminated in and was best exemplified
by the merger of "new, new thing" AOL and real thing Time Warner) is what people
like Skilling, Fastow, Lay, et al would respond to, in the way that they did.
So did all the investment bankers and venture capitalists complicit in issuing
hundreds of essentially fraudulent, if legal, IPOs, during that period, which
also was almost inevitable under the circumstances. NASDAQ lost 78% and the
equity markets $8 trillion in market cap, March 2000 top to October 2002 bottom,
one of the two largest crashes in history, and most IPO's lost far more than
the market averages.
(I apologize to those, especially fair, honest people in the financial industry,
who may take exception with such a strong characterization, I fully realize
that most probably believe the "irrational exuberance" explanation of that
bubble. This is not the time nor place to rehash that discussion.)
The wrong solution to corporate governance problems such as those exposed
at Enron is to saddle productive corporate America with all sorts of very burdensome
busywork bureaucratic rules and regulations, a la Sarbox. That is extremely
counter-productive, especially for innovative and/or small companies which
help drive the U.S. economy.
Sarbox is also very unfair and not in the American tradition of presumed innocence
and fair dealing. Corporate America, which all but an infinitesimally small
part of (on which the mass media focused) is honest, productive and well-meaning,
was put in the perpetual Sarbox penalty box.
It is simply not fair and honest to punish very hard-working entrepreneurs,
executives and managers with this onerous regulatory burden when they have
never done anything wrong, and never will.
Sarbox has just been the Wrong Solution to the Wrong Problem all along. It
was simply a knee-jerk political response--just what you would expect. Unfortunately,
nothing has really changed to address the Real Problem.
A real solution to the real problem that caused the corporate scandals must
address the core issue of the increasingly pressing need to start to rein in
the worst excesses of the global speculative financial system. In this credit
cycle, these excesses may be even more out of control than during the TMT equity
bubble.
But up until now, they remain far more hidden from the media and public view
in the credit and derivative markets (hence the credit excesses may have a
chance to build up to dangerous levels before recognized by investors in public
markets that may be affected, similar to an undetected gas leak that results
in an unexpected explosion).
|