|
Signs Of The Times:
"More Professors are Lured Out of Ivory Towers to Wall Street"
"Demand for new funds offers a chance to test theories, and to make
money."
- Wall Street Journal April 21
"1901 was ... speculative demonstration based . . . on the assumption that
we were living in a new era; that old rules and principles and precedent of
finance were obsolete; that things could safely be done to-day which had been
dangerous or impossible in the past. The illusion seized on the public mind
in 1901 quite as firmly as it did in 1929. It differed only in the fact that
there were no college professors in 1901 who preached the popular illusion
as their new political economy."
This valid summary of 1929 was made by Alexander Dana Noyes who was the highly
regarded financial columnist with the New York Times.
It could also be worthwhile to recall that in 1998 some of the bigger hedge
funds were boasting that they had numerous PhDs on the payroll. Even more assuring
of outstanding returns was Long Term Capital Management's boast of having a
couple of Nobel Prize economists on board. LTCM is likely the biggest single
disaster in financial history and it's too bad that Noyes wasn't around for
it -- maybe in spirit.
It wasn't too long after this calamity that interventionist intellectualism
had accomplished exactly the right recipe to achieve a sustainable boom. This
was celebrated in 2000 as "Goldilocks", which was considered
to be a lot more exciting that an earlier theme called "Rosie Scenario".
Then came the tech bust that devastated both stock and corporate bond markets
from 1Q 2000 to 4Q 2002.
What's more, Lady Bountiful is again promoting her compelling daughter, as
well distinguished, but nevertheless, rent-seeking professors.
However, in the interests of impartiality, some professors can get it right.
In 1910 Professor David Kinley provided an example of tearing down the old
dogma in his criticism of the conventional wisdom of the 1870's ". .
. the action of the independent treasury, as managed by [the] Secretary, favoured
speculation rather than legitimate business, by ill timed contractions and
expansions which the Secretary caused, so that its influence must, on the whole,
be set down as evil."
The instruction for today is that Kinley was likely sympathetic to another
US experiment in central banking and it was essential to condemn the old system
before promoting the "new" system.
Irony is supreme. At the height of the 1873 mania for stocks and commodities
the typical strains developed in the credit markets. This included an inverted
yield curve as well as unusually narrow credit spreads. Despite this the leading
New York newspaper claimed that the Treasury System, headed by Treasury Secretary
Richardson had powers to inflate credit greater than those of a mere central
bank.
Because the US was on a fiat currency and not constrained by a central bank
with a goldback currency nothing could go wrong.
The contraction that endured from 1873 to 1893 was described as "The
Great Depression" from 1884 until around 1940. When it comes to
the financial world, one of the longest-running trends is irony.
The reasons that this bull market will continue are similar to those that
provided inspiration at the peak of the "New Era" in 1873. Worship
of a fiat currency and brilliant central banking contrasts with the former
worship of the same but with equally brilliant treasury system.
The following quote from the Financial Post of April 25 more or less says
the same thing, but in today's terms.
"Chairman Bernanke has succeeded. The economy has positioned on a
sustainable track for manageable expansion: A Goldilocks scenario that
is neither too hot nor too cold."
|