Category Archives: Economic fundamentals

Philip Pilkington: Economic Fetishism – Three Objects of Perverse Intellectual Pleasure

By Philip Pilkington, a journalist and writer based in Dublin, Ireland

Watch out, I have a large, very large fur, with which I could cover you up entirely, and I have a mind to catch you in it as in a net.
– Leopold von Sacher-Masoch

Many aspects of contemporary economic theory certainly seem to have their origins in the mythic and the moral rather than in the realm of the rational. But while this seems to be an accurate description of the system as a whole, it does not seem quite able to account for certain aspects of this system which appear to be rather obsessive in the minds of its adherents.

These obsessions, or ‘fetishes’, can be explained in like terms, that is: compared to certain primitive rituals and superstitions. To do so we will first have to form a better understanding of the fetish itself; an Enlightenment concept that has a long and interesting history.

The specific fetishes we will explore will be the most important today: the government, inflation and gold. All these phenomena are interconnected in neoclassical economic theory (yes, even gold, or at least the ghost thereof), however, they tend to lead their own individual existence outside of the Grand Neoclassical System itself. In and of themselves they are, for economists and economic commentators, fetishes that can be worshipped in dark rooms away from the great hall. They are like fragments of the main theory that adherents smuggle out of the temple and obsess over in their own private shrines.

DeLong Illustrates Why We Should Be Scared of Economists

Several readers sent me links to a Brad DeLong post which they took to be a rebuttal to a takedown I did of a recent Ezra Klein piece.

Since DeLong did not link to or mention my post, I doubt his piece had anything to do with mine. But his post is noteworthy for a completely different reason: it illustrates how economists have refused to learn much, if anything, from the crisis.

Tom Adams: How Treasury’s “Kick the Can” Strategy Exacerbates Mortgage Market Woes (Mortgage Insurer Edition)

By Tom Adams, an attorney and former monoline executive

Barron’s published a detailed take down of the mortgage insurance industry weekend that highlights how Treasury’s approach to the mortgage mess will ultimately make matters worse. As the article points out, in the fairly likely scenario that mortgage claims exceed the amount of capital the insurers have available to pay them, the parties taking the biggest hit will be Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That means taxpayers are probably on the hook for more bailouts.

Despite having questionable capital reserves for the future claims they face, mortgage insurers are still continuing to write significant insurance business. Why would anybody want to continue to buy insurance from such shaky companies?

The continuing business of the mortgage insurers help shed light on the fact that virtually the entire mortgage industry is run through zombie companies that ought to have expired years ago.

Alex Andreou: Democracy vs Mythology – The Battle in Syntagma Square

By Alex Andreou, a successful lawyer turned actor living in London. Cross posted from SturdyBlog

I have never been more desperate to explain and more hopeful for your understanding of any single fact than this: The protests in Greece concern all of you directly.

What is going on in Athens at the moment is resistance against an invasion; an invasion as brutal as that against Poland in 1939. The invading army wears suits instead of uniforms and holds laptops instead of guns, but make no mistake – the attack on our sovereignty is as violent and thorough. Private wealth interests are dictating policy to a sovereign nation, which is expressly and directly against its national interest. Ignore it at your peril. Say to yourselves, if you wish, that perhaps it will stop there. That perhaps the bailiffs will not go after the Portugal and Ireland next. And then Spain and the UK. But it is already beginning to happen. This is why you cannot afford to ignore these events.

Eurozone Brinksmanship: Ministers Walk Back Greek Rollover Commitment, Demand Austerity Measures First

One of the interesting features of the seemingly unending Eurozone crisis is that the half life of rescue measures is decreasing.

The elephant in the room, which we will put aside to focus on the current state of play, is that everyone knows the Greek debts must be restructured. To have Greece pay out punitive rates on past debt will simply grind the economy into a deeper hole, worsening its debt to GDP ratio and eroding its physical and human infrastructure. All the delay of the inevitable does is allow for more extend and pretend while Western financial firms strip the economy for fun and profit. And this is terribly inefficient looting; their profits from this pilferage will be small relative to the pain inflicted on the Greek populace.

Late last week, various commentators made a bit too much of the clearing of one obstacle to the extension of yet another short lifeline to Greece, namely, that Angel Merkel had relaxed one of conditions that stood in the way of a planned €12 billion credit extension. She had wanted private creditors to share in the pain, and agreed that a rollover of currently maturing debt would do. Before she had insisted on a full bond exchange, which would have resulted in a much more significant hit to investors.

This concession did not go over well in Germany.

Stephen Roach: America is a Zombie Nation just like Japan

Cross-posted from Credit Writedowns Stephen Roach has written an Op-Ed in today’s Financial Times that is worth reading. He outlines his version of Richard Koo’s Balance Sheet Recession theorem, opining that “the global economy is being hobbled by a new generation of zombies – the economic walking dead.” His main points are: American consumers are […]

Martin Wolf: Why China Could Fail Like Japan

The Financial Times’ economics editor Martin Wolf takes up the theme treated at some length by China-based economist MIchael Pettis: that Chinas’ economy has moved into unknown and dangerous terrain. No sizeable economy has had investment and exports combined constitute nearly 50% of GDP, and that model is not sustainable. As we have indicted, there is evidence that investment is becoming less and less productive. China is taking $7 of debt to generate $1 of GDP, when the US at the tail end of the bubble needed a mere $4 to $5 of debt for each incremental $1 of growth.

We’ve often recapped Pettis here and are glad to see Wolf take up his analysis.

Wolf does recite the optimist case on China, with the biggest factor being that China has a long way to go in improving the incomes of its citizens, and that alone can give it a very long lasting growth trajectory.

On the risks, Wolf sets aside commodities scarcity and environmental issues to focus solely on the economics case.

Inept Obama “Anybody but Warren” Stance Reveals Fundamental Bank v. Middle Class Fault Line

It is obvious that Elizabeth Warren should head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. No less than our favorite NC nemesis, the staunch Administration defender Economics of Contempt, has said she is “tailor made” for the job. In the face of increasingly vocal bank opposition to the notion of an effective bank watchdog for consumers, she’s done better than anyone anticipated. And despite the Republican bluster about using a pro forma session to keep the Senate in business to block a recess appointment, the Democrats could break that maneuver if they wanted to.

So why does Team Obama try to hide its choice not to appoint her behind silly “compromises” like its trial balloon of serving up the CFPB’s number two, Raj Date, as a candidate to lead the agency? The Republicans have already said they will approve no one unless they can cut off CFPB’s air supply by controlling its budget. You can’t negotiate with someone who won’t negotiate. Your options are to defy them or capitulate.

So this “compromise” is an inept sleigh of hand to shift responsibility for the Adminsitration’s refusal to appoint Warren on the Republicans.

The failure of the Team Obama to move beyond this impasse is revealing. It isn’t merely, as we have repeatedly mentioned, a sign that the Administration is in bed with the banksters. That’s a given. We predicted that Warren would not get the job.

But what is astonishing is how she has managed to out maneuver them and how Team Obama has failed for months to come up with responses. It isn’t as if this crowd feels any compunction to hide the contempt it has for the idea of keeping prior promises; just look for some of many examples, at this video Lifting the Veil, from 7:00 to 13:00, or at Glenn Greenwald’s discussion of how in mere weeks what was promised to be a mere fly over exercise in Libya is now turning into another nation-building exercise.

The Warren fiasco reveals deeper layers of the Administration’s character defects: its indifference to the plight of the middle class and its tactical incompetence

Michael Hudson: The Financial Road to Serfdom – How Bankers are Using the Debt Crisis to Roll Back the Progressive Era

By Michael Hudson, a research professor of Economics at University of Missouri, Kansas City and a research associate at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. Cross posted from CounterPunch.

Financial strategists do not intend to let today’s debt crisis go to waste. Foreclosure time has arrived. That means revolution – or more accurately, a counter-revolution to roll back the 20th century’s gains made by social democracy: pensions and social security, public health care and other infrastructure providing essential services at subsidized prices or for free. The basic model follows the former Soviet Union’s post-1991 neoliberal reforms: privatization of public enterprises, a high flat tax on labor but only nominal taxes on real estate and finance, and deregulation of the economy’s prices, working conditions and credit terms.

Richard Alford: If War Is Too Important To Be Left To The Generals, Isn’t Economic Policy Too Important To Be Left To Economists?

By Richard Alford, a former economist at the New York Fed. Since then, he has worked in the financial industry as a trading floor economist and strategist on both the sell side and the buy side.

Apologies to both Clemenceau (Prime Minister of France 1917-1920) and General Jack D. Ripper (Dr. Strangelove 1964)

The recent crisis and continuing economic and financial dislocations has led many to question the usefulness of the current macroeconomic paradigm, if not economics more generally. Raghuram Rajan, whose paper, “Has Financial Development made the World Riskier,” was summarily dismissed at the Fed Jackson Hole Conference in 2005, has recently posted a piece titled “Why Did Economists Not Foresee the Crisis?” In this piece, Rajan rejects three popular explanations for the failure of economics and economic policy, i.e. the absence of “models that could account for the behavior”, “ideology”, and “corruption”. Rajan offers alternative explanation(s): “I (Rajan) would argue that three factors largely explain our (economists) collective failure: specialization, the difficulty of forecasting, and the disengagement of much of the profession from the real world.” The logical conclusion of Rajan’s explanation(s) is that to avoid future crises, the role of economists, or at least academic economists, in the policy formulation process should be reduced. More troubling yet for economists, including Rajan, is some recent work by Frydman and Goldberg which argues that current economic models are inherently flawed.

Rajan dismisses the argument that economics lacked relevant models. He cites the fact that academic economists have studied and modeled many of the factors that contributed to the crisis. Rajan does, however, cite the compartmentalization of economics which leaves macroeconomists ignorant of findings in other sub-disciplines of economics.

In Rajan’s view, the inability to forecast accurately reflects shortcomings in the current model. All models of the economy abstract from the complexities of the economy and financial system. Models are simplifications of realty. Hence the models are incorrect. (We will return to this point later.) The only questions are how large and costly will the model-driven errors be.

Observers should not be surprised by the fact that the models employed by economists contained simplifying assumptions. However, they should be disturbed by the recent performance of policymakers. They ought to ask the question: why did economists remain wedded to their model despite the growth of all the macro-economically important economic and financial imbalances and unsustainabilities that existed in the years prior to the crisis?

Steve Keen: Dude! Where’s My Recovery?

By Steve Keen, Associate Professor of Economics & Finance at the University of Western Sydney, and author of the book Debunking Economics. Cross posted from Steve Keen’s Debtwatch.

I initially planned to call this post “Economic Growth, Asset Markets and the Credit Accelerator”, but recent negative data out of America makes me think that this title is more in line with conversations currently taking place in the White House.

According to the NBER, the “Great Recession” is now two years behind us, but the recovery that normally follows a recession has not occurred. While growth did rise for a while, it has been anaemic compared to the norm after a recession, and it is already trending down. Growth needs to exceed 3 per cent per annum to reduce unemployment—the rule of thumb known as Okun’s Law—and it needs to be substantially higher than this to make serious inroads into it. Instead, growth barely peeped its head above Okun’s level. It is now below it again, and trending down.

Chinese Real Estate Bubble Finally Imploding?

The warnings of successful shorts like Jim Chanos, old Asia hands like Frank Verneroso, and economists like Victor Shih and Michael Pettis have failed to curb enthusiasm for the belief that the rise of China is inevitable and unstoppable. As someone who was deeply involved with Japan when it was seen as destined to replace the sclerotic US, I’ve learned to regard more or less straight line growth projections with considerable skepticism.

China has accomplished the impressive feat of bringing literally hundreds of millions out of poverty in a comparatively short time frame. It has also studied the Japanese playbook and managed to avoid some of its pitfalls (of course, it has the advantage of not being a military protectorate of the US), in particular refusing to liberalize its financial markets (some accounts of the Japanese bubble and burst give considerable weight to overly rapid deregulation and the growth of what was then called zaitech, or financial speculation). is also hostile to neoclassical economists.

China escaped much of the impact of the global financial crisis by ramping up investment even higher than its pre-crisis level. It now has investment approaching 50% of GDP, an unheard of level on a sustained basis. A big chunk of that is housing related (housing is an estimated 13.5% of GDP), and prices have long been considerably out of line with incomes, a telltale sign of a bubble. In Beijing, admittedly one of the hottest markets, an average priced new apartment was equal to 57 years of average worker savings (and if you tried to pay for it with a super-long dated mortgage, you’d be in hock even longer, since you would also need to cover the interest charges).

Another warning sign is inventory overhang; the Wall Street Journal reports tonight that Standard Chartered forecasts that level of unsold apartments in secondary cities will amounts to roughly 20 months of sales by year end (and that’s before considering that many of the apartments are being acquired as investments rather than for use).

The Journal story tonight provides evidence that the Chinese housing market is going into reverse

William Dudley on Economic Policy

Cross -posted from Credit Writedowns New York Fed Chief William Dudley gave a speech yesterday called “U.S. Economic Policy in a Global Context” (hat tip Yves Smith). Dudley’s overall aim was to show that one must regard US policy in an international context and not based on domestic factors alone. I think the whole Speech […]