|
Dear Diary,
This is the Fake Ben Bernanke writing. I've started a journal to express in
private what I could never express in public, namely that the dollar and stock
market are at real risk and the policy of lower interest rates might be misguided.
How far does this crisis go? The more I study the issue, the more I'm convinced
we're going down - all the way down the rabbit hole. Why? Thanks to Alan Greenspan
and Ben Bernanke (me, or is it?), we have just experienced one of the largest,
fastest creations of excess credit in history.

That is something that hasn't happened since the 1920s.

Now the credit/asset bubble is bursting. Assets (houses, stocks, etc.) are
coming down to more reasonable values relative to output and labor, but they
still have a long way to fall.

The unfortunate aspect is that the debt associated with the declining assets
remains. The asset prices had no fundamental reason to go up in the first place,
other than cheap and available debt from the Fed (look how single family vacant
housing numbers were always rising during the boom).

"The system has one chunk in it," said Michael Fascitelli, president of Vornado
Realty Trust. "When you're constipated, you're not very hungry are you. Nothing
goes in until something comes out. The Wall Street firms will not resume lending
at the pace they did until they've cleared that big load."
The marketing side of my brain disagrees with Mr. Fascitelli's decision to
use such an analogy. The intellectual side of my brain disagrees that one "chunk" is
the problem. The "chunk" is in fact the entire financial system and the way
in which the Fed operates.
The Fed operates by lowering interest rates and encouraging more debt assumption
WHENEVER there is the slightest hint of an economic recession. It seems as
if the Fed only believes in free markets when they are going up. When markets
are going down, and threatening to bankrupt inefficient businesses and engage
in the creative destruction, the Fed and government step in, with lower rates,
mortgage freezes, tax breaks, and more.
As a result, the system becomes more and more burdened by debt. At a certain
point, assets are priced too high relative to output and labor, and debt is
too great relative to GDP. The only way to solve the situation is via lower
asset prices and higher labor prices - in other words a combination of a recession
and inflation. Contrary to current Fed thinking, under the situation they have
created, BOTH a recession and inflation is the likely simultaneous outcome.
Or as Mervyn King, Bank of England Governor said recently, "The Committee's
current judgment is that the most likely outcome is for output growth to slow
and inflation to rise, at least for a period."
To give you an idea of the size of the crisis, Robert Shiller, Yale economist
and index co-founder, believes the housing cycle is very important to the business
cycle. Most economic recessions are preceded by housing declines and residential
construction is an important leading indicator for the economy. Shiller believes
the current situation is unprecedented: there's never had been a housing boom
quite like the one that ended last year.
Another example is Credit Default Swaps (CDSs). There were $28.8 trillion
in CDSs outstanding as of December 2006 (according to the Bank for International
Settlements). Any issues with CDSs would make the subprime crisis look like
a gnat next to an elephant. That $28.8 trillion is up 107% from the previous
year. Does that kind of growth indicate a credit bubble?
CDSs are essentially insurance of whether a bond/company (let's call it GM
for simplicity's sake) will default on its payments. The CDSs are swaps that
banks and hedge funds trade with each other. One party pays for this insurance
with cash payments. The counterparty issues an insurance-like policy that pays
out if (in our example) GM defaults. The counterparty must post collateral
to prove it can pay this policy in the event of default. As the price of a
CDS changes, more collateral may be needed (the collateral requirements are
marked to market).
Most bankers I have spoken with feel this mark to market aspect means there
is little risk in CDSs. I agree in principle when it comes to one contract,
but I disagree in total because all the CDSs added up create massive systemic
risk. Here is why:
If a recession hits and the number of defaults skyrockets, CDSs will skyrocket
in price, forcing counterparties throughout the banking system to post more
and more collateral SIMULTANEOUSLY. To come up with the collateral, the counterparties
will need to sell other assets quickly. The more assets they sell, the more
the market will go down. The effects of the sell-off and recession will become
more severe, forcing more defaults, and making it such that the counterparties
have to post even more collateral. In the end, any bank or hedge fund that
has issued too many CDSs will be unable to come up with enough collateral and
will themselves default. The original buyer of the insurance will find that
their insurance company cannot pay up, so they too will incur losses from the
underlying bonds they hold (which have defaulted). As Warren Buffett wrote
in 2006: "Unless derivatives contracts are collateralized or guaranteed, their
ultimate value also depends on the creditworthiness of the counterparties to
them. In the meantime, though, before a contract is settled, the counterparties
record profits and losses -often huge in amount- in their current earnings
statements without so much as a penny changing hands."
And what are the chances of a recession? According to the futures markets,
it is now just under 50%. A friend at a big bank who creates an index of high-yield
bonds says his index's pricing indicates that the market expects 40% of his
companies to default. Pimco's Bill Gross claims that "we haven't faced a downturn
like this since the Depression...It does keep me up at night."
That said, I'm sleeping well at night. I know we're going to lower rates a
lot! We are not paying attention to the falling dollar, the price of oil, and
the price of gold. More important to us is the health of the banking system.
If we have to sacrifice either the dollar or the banking system, it will be
the dollar. As Richard Fisher, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President, said
on November 29th, "we have to be very mindful of the fact that in order for
capitalism...to continue to function, we have to have a healthy working financial
market."
It's hard to bet against the markets, with Bernanke and friends willing to
sacrifice the dollar. That's why I continue to buy gold.
|