BP issues

bp issues

I now fear something far worse.

BP appears to have delayed measures to plug the well and stop the damage.

Instead it appears they have taken measures to salvage revenues.

They inserted a siphon tube that initially allowed them to load a portion of the escaping crude onto surface ships, presumably to be sold.

Instead of inserting a siphon tube, could BP have deposited aggregate (rocks) or other materials (steel rods, etc.) to start filling the hole with something ‘heavy’ that could obstruct the outward flow?

In fact, would not something as simple as an armada of barges filled with aggregate dumping their fill over the open pipe have built a mound over it that, when it got high enough, would completely stop the leaking crude?

Right from the beginning, could there not have been an emergency call to action for the US Navy and Coast Guard, as well as privately owned ships, to begin the parade of barges needed to continually dump aggregate over the site?

There has been no discussion that I have seen along these lines. Instead, public trust, as low as it may poll, remains high enough for it to be unthinkable that BP could have made the decision to attempt to siphon some crude rather than immediately take measures to plug the well based on narrow corporate cost/benefit analysis that showed the clean up costs of leakage that could have been stopped to be less than the present value of the well if it could be salvaged.

Warren Mosler
www.moslerforsenate.com
www.moslereconomics.com

Krugman has it right

Lost Decade Looming?

By Paul Krugman

May 20 (NYT) —Despite a chorus of voices claiming otherwise, we aren’t Greece. We are, however, looking more and more like Japan.

For the past few months, much commentary on the economy — some of it posing as reporting — has had one central theme: policy makers are doing too much. Governments need to stop spending, we’re told. Greece is held up as a cautionary tale, and every uptick in the interest rate on U.S. government bonds is treated as an indication that markets are turning on America over its deficits. Meanwhile, there are continual warnings that inflation is just around the corner, and that the Fed needs to pull back from its efforts to support the economy and get started on its “exit strategy,” tightening credit by selling off assets and raising interest rates.

And what about near-record unemployment, with long-term unemployment worse than at any time since the 1930s? What about the fact that the employment gains of the past few months, although welcome, have, so far, brought back fewer than 500,000 of the more than 8 million jobs lost in the wake of the financial crisis? Hey, worrying about the unemployed is just so 2009.

But the truth is that policy makers aren’t doing too much; they’re doing too little. Recent data don’t suggest that America is heading for a Greece-style collapse of investor confidence. Instead, they suggest that we may be heading for a Japan-style lost decade, trapped in a prolonged era of high unemployment and slow growth.

As we discussed, could not agree more!

Let’s talk first about those interest rates. On several occasions over the past year, we’ve been told, after some modest rise in rates, that the bond vigilantes had arrived, that America had better slash its deficit right away or else. Each time, rates soon slid back down. Most recently, in March, there was much ado about the interest rate on U.S. 10-year bonds, which had risen from 3.6 percent to almost 4 percent. “Debt fears send rates up” was the headline at The Wall Street Journal, although there wasn’t actually any evidence that debt fears were responsible.

Correct, it was fears that growth would cause the fed to hike rates to something more ‘normal’

Since then, however, rates have retraced that rise and then some. As of Thursday, the 10-year rate was below 3.3 percent. I wish I could say that falling interest rates reflect a surge of optimism about U.S. federal finances. What they actually reflect, however, is a surge of pessimism about the prospects for economic recovery, pessimism that has sent investors fleeing out of anything that looks risky — hence, the plunge in the stock market — into the perceived safety of U.S. government debt.

Yes, though I would say pessimism that slow growth and negative CPI cause markets to discount ‘low for a lot longer’ rates from the Fed. It’s all about the Fed’s reaction function. Long rates are the sum of short rates, plus or minus a few ‘supply technicals.’

What’s behind this new pessimism? It partly reflects the troubles in Europe, which have less to do with government debt than you’ve heard; the real problem is that by creating the euro, Europe’s leaders imposed a single currency on economies that weren’t ready for such a move.

The euro govt debt is highly problematic as they are all set up like US States and will bounce checks if they don’t have sufficient funds in their accounts. Unlike the US, Japan, UK, etc. the credit risk in the euro zone is real, just like the US States. And that forces them to act pro cyclically, cutting back and tightening up in slowdowns, again like the US States.

But there are also warning signs at home, most recently Wednesday’s report on consumer prices, which showed a key measure of inflation falling below 1 percent, bringing it to a 44-year low.

This isn’t really surprising: you expect inflation to fall in the face of mass unemployment and excess capacity. But it is nonetheless really bad news. Low inflation, or worse yet deflation, tends to perpetuate an economic slump, because it encourages people to hoard cash rather than spend, which keeps the economy depressed, which leads to more deflation. That vicious circle isn’t hypothetical: just ask the Japanese, who entered a deflationary trap in the 1990s and, despite occasional episodes of growth, still can’t get out. And it could happen here.

Banks, too, are necessarily pro cyclical, making matters worse in down turns. Only the Federal government can be counter cyclical, however, unfortunately, our Federal government thinks it’s ‘run out of money’ and ‘dependent on foreign borrowing that our children will have to pay back.’ Complete nonsense, but they believe it, as does the mainstream media and academic community.

So what we should really be asking right now isn’t whether we’re about to turn into Greece. We should, instead, be asking what we’re doing to avoid turning Japanese. And the answer is, nothing.

Agreed!

It’s not that nobody understands the risk. I strongly suspect that some officials at the Fed see the Japan parallels all too clearly and wish they could do more to support the economy. But in practice it’s all they can do to contain the tightening impulses of their colleagues, who (like central bankers in the 1930s) remain desperately afraid of inflation despite the absence of any evidence of rising prices. I also suspect that Obama administration economists would very much like to see another stimulus plan. But they know that such a plan would have no chance of getting through a Congress that has been spooked by the deficit hawks.

Agreed, and because they don’t have a sufficient grasp of monetary operations to support the case for a fiscal adjustment large enough to close the output gap and get us back to full employment.

In short, fear of imaginary threats has prevented any effective response to the real danger facing our economy.

Completely agree! See my ‘7 Deadly Frauds of Economic Policy’

Will the worst happen? Not necessarily. Maybe the economic measures already taken will end up doing the trick, jump-starting a self-sustaining recovery. Certainly, that’s what we’re all hoping. But hope is not a plan.

They seem complacent with the forecast 5 year glide path to 5% unemployment.

senator kohl on SS “solvency”

Press Release of AGING – NON Committee

KOHL: SOCIAL SECURITY SOLVENCY, TARGETED BENEFITS CAN BE IMPROVED WITH MODEST TWEAKS

Aging Committee Report Delivered to Members of the Fiscal Commission
Contact: Ashley Glacel (202) 224-5364
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today U.S. Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI), Chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, released an official Committee report on Social Security. The report outlines the challenges currently facing America’s retirement program and highlights options for addressing program solvency,

There is no solvency issue. The premise for the changes is a mistake.

benefit adequacy, and retirement income security for economically-vulnerable groups. Emphasizing that a majority of America’s seniors rely on Social Security as their primary source of income, the report calls on Congress to enact modest changes to Social Security in the near future to bring its long-term financing into balance and improve benefits for those who need them most.

“This report shows that, contrary to popular belief, the sky is absolutely not falling for Social Security. By implementing one or more of these modest changes, we can ensure solvency and even strengthen benefits for those who count on their monthly check the most,” said Chairman Kohl.

The sky is not falling even with the ‘modest changes’

Copies of the report were delivered to all eighteen members of President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. Many of the Commission’s members have publicly mentioned their interest in addressing Social Security as part of their work to reduce the federal deficit.

Deficit reduction also stems from an incorrect premise

“Social Security has never been responsible for one penny of the federal deficit, and by law is barred from doing so. In fact, it has been in surplus every year since its inception. If the Commission chooses to take a look at the program, it is my hope that they find our Aging Committee report of use,” Kohl said.

Whether it is in surplus or deficit alters aggregate demand, not solvency. Solvency is not the issue.

The report points out that the nation’s demographics have changed significantly since the Social Security program began in 1935. Americans are living longer, women’s participation in the labor force has significantly increased, and with a rise in the divorce rate, household composition has changed. The labor force is also growing more slowly and with fewer companies offering pensions, the nature of work and compensation has altered in ways that affect workers’ ability to save for retirement. Therefore, in addition to improving solvency,

Solvency is not an issue

any future reforms to the program should take into account America’s evolving demographics in order to ensure that benefits are adequate and equitable for generations to come.

Those are the only relevant criteria.

The report includes an important disclaimer that the options laid out represent a range of commonly-considered proposals, and that none of them should be construed as having been endorsed by the Committee or its members. In the foreword, Chairman Kohl asserts: “Many members of the Committee, including myself, do not support and actively oppose many of the options. However, a full and informed debate begins with the collection of research and information, and it is our hope that this report will serve as a resource to Congress and policymakers as they discuss ways to ensure that Social Security will remain strong for another 75 years.”

Germany Seeks ‘Orderly’ Insolvency Option for Euro Members

Germany Seeks ‘Orderly’ Insolvency Option for Euro Members

(Bloomberg) Germany is proposing that the European Union create the option of an “orderly state insolvency” for countries using the euro, according to a Finance Ministry document. That would set incentives for governments to follow “solid” fiscal policies and for “responsible” behavior by investors, the document said.

This is a very critical issue. Germany doesn’t want to have to write the check for other euro member’s debt.
An ‘orderly state insolvency’ would mean the lenders would lose their investment rather than get bailed out.

The main problem with this is that by making insolvency a viable option, euro members become subject to increased liquidity risk. And, in the case of actual insolvency and legal debt write downs, euro bank assets are written down as well, subjecting them to increased liquidity risk as well.

CPI

Can’t resist the temptation to repeat my suspicions that zero interest rate policy is deflationary from the supply and the demand side.

:)


Karim writes:

Great number for low for long camp; gives Fed ample cover to stay on hold.
Y/Y Core now at 34yr low of 0.9%; but likely to bottom around these levels as base comparisons begin to get a bit tougher.

Headline CPI -.07% m/m; Core +.05%
Trend variables stay on trend; volatile components offsetting

  • OER unch; medical 0.2%; education 0.2%
  • Apparel -0.7%; Lodging away from home +1.4%

China Daily – Shanghai Home Sales Fell to 5-Year Low

Commodities looking weak as well.

Always been a question as to whether the central bank’s tools can gradually deflate a property bubble or just facilitate a crash.

Shanghai Home Sales Fell to 5-Year Low Last Week on Tightening
China CPI to be around 3% in May, June: NDRC
China to Sell Five-Year Government Debt at 2.4%, Survey Shows
China’s Smaller Stocks Face ‘Major Correction’: Chart of Day

EU Daily | Trichet remains confident in ECB plan

The euro zone is standing on the deflation pedal hard enough to turn the euro northward when the portfolio adjustments have run their course, which could be relatively soon.

And the indications of growing exports are more evidence the currency could bottom and start to appreciate.

Like Japan, when relative prices get to where exports pick up it causes the foreign sector to get short (net borrowed) in that currency, which tends to cause the currency to appreciate to the point exports fall off.

The ‘answer’ is to buy dollars as Japan did for many years, and China continues to do. And note how strong the yen got after Japan stopped buying dollars- strong enough to keep a lid on exports. But the euro zone ideology won’t allow the ECB to buy dollars should the euro start to appreciate, as that would give the appearance of the euro backing the dollar.

So right now a euro strong enough to slow exports would be highly problematic for a continent already in the midst of a deflationary spiral with its fiscal authority, the ECB, forbidden to offer the needed fundamental support.

The price of gold in euro could be the indicator of this turn of events. The portfolio shifting has driven up that gold price, and a downturn could be the indication that the portfolio shifting is getting played out.

But for you traders out there- I wouldn’t be early or try to call the precise bottom of the euro.

There’s no telling how much more portfolio shifting lies ahead.

Trichet remains confident in ECB plan
Trichet Says Greek Situation Resembled Lehman Collapse
Trichet: economy in deepest crisis since WWII
Stark Says ECB Measures ‘Only Bought Time’
Weber Says Crisis Response Must ‘Respect’ Policy Divisions
Stark Shares Weber’s View on ECB Bond Purchases, FAS Reports
ECB’s Nowotny Says Euro’s Drop of ‘No Specific Concern’
Lagarde Says Greek Debt Restructuring Isn’t an Option, FAZ Says
Berlin calls for eurozone budget laws
Schaeuble Has Plan to Stabilize Euro
Papandreou Says Greece Is a Good Investment, Handelsblatt Says
Spain puts labour reform on agenda
Italy to Make Extraordinaray Spending Cuts, Minister Says
April EU car sales fall as cash-for-clunkers fades

Krugman: We’re Not Greece

We’re Not Greece

By Paul Krugman

It’s an ill wind that blows nobody good, and the crisis in Greece is making some people — people who opposed health care reform and are itching for an excuse to dismantle Social Security — very, very happy. Everywhere you look there are editorials and commentaries, some posing as objective reporting, asserting that Greece today will be America tomorrow unless we abandon all that nonsense about taking care of those in need.

True. I just finished a week in dc fighting back against the bipartisan move to cut social security.

The truth, however, is that America isn’t Greece — and, in any case, the message from Greece isn’t what these people would have you believe.

So, how do America and Greece compare?

Both nations have lately been running large budget deficits, roughly comparable as a percentage of G.D.P. Markets, however, treat them very differently: The interest rate on Greek government bonds is more than twice the rate on U.S. bonds, because investors see a high risk that Greece will eventually default on its debt, while seeing virtually no risk that America will do the same. Why?

One answer is that we have a much lower level of debt — the amount we already owe, as opposed to new borrowing — relative to G.D.P.

That has nothing to do with it. Japan’s debt is near triple ours, and their 10 year rates are about 1.3% for example.

True, our debt should have been even lower. We’d be better positioned to deal with the current emergency if so much money hadn’t been squandered on tax cuts for the rich and an unfunded war.

Not true. With us govt spending not operational revenue constrained the way greece is, we are always able to spend (or cut taxes) however much we want to. It’s a political decision without external constraints.

But we still entered the crisis in much better shape than the Greeks.

Yes, because we are the issuer of the dollar and greece is not the issuer of the euro. Greece is like a us state in that regard.

Even more important, however, is the fact that we have a clear path to economic recovery, while Greece doesn’t.

For the same reason. We can manage our aggregate demand because our fiscal policy is not operationally constrained by revenue the way Greece is.

The U.S. economy has been growing since last summer, thanks to fiscal stimulus

Yes, mostly the automatic stabilizers with some help from the proactive measures congress has taken, however misguided.

and expansionary policies by the Federal Reserve.

I don’t agree with this but that’s another story.

I wish that growth were faster; still, it’s finally producing job gains — and it’s also showing up in revenues.

True, however the output gap is finally stable at best as it remains tragically wide.

Right now we’re on track to match Congressional Budget Office projections of a substantial rise in tax receipts. Put those projections together with the Obama administration’s policies, and they imply a sharp fall in the budget deficit over the next few years.

Yes, with our only hope for lower unemployment being an increase in private sector debt that exceeds that. Not my first choice in mending what ails us.

Greece, on the other hand, is caught in a trap. During the good years, when capital was flooding in, Greek costs and prices got far out of line with the rest of Europe. If Greece still had its own currency, it could restore competitiveness through devaluation.

Should have been said this way-

‘If Greece had its own currency and was running its deficits in local currency market forces would have caused the currency to depreciate.’

But since it doesn’t, and since leaving the euro is still considered unthinkable, Greece faces years of grinding deflation and low or zero economic growth. So the only way to reduce deficits is through savage budget cuts, and investors are skeptical about whether those cuts will actually happen.

True. And worse. The proactive cuts and tax hikes can slow the economy to the point the deficit doesn’t come down, and might even increase, making matters even worse.

It’s worth noting, by the way, that Britain — which is in worse fiscal shape than we are, but which, unlike Greece, hasn’t adopted the euro — remains able to borrow at fairly low interest rates. Having your own currency, it seems, makes a big difference.

It is all the difference.

Hard to see why that isn’t obvious. US, UK, Japan, etc. Etc. With one’s own non convertible currency and floating exchange rates, interest rates are necessarily set by the central bank, not by markets.

And govt securities function to support interest rates and not to fund expenditures

And note the uk economy is on the mend. Even housing has found a bid, with the main risk being a govt that doesn’t get it and tries to balance the budget.

In short, we’re not Greece. We may currently be running deficits of comparable size, but our economic position — and, as a result, our fiscal outlook — is vastly better.

Wrong reason- we are the issuer of our own currency, the dollar, while Greece is the user of the euro and not the issuer.

That said, we do have a long-run budget problem. But what’s the root of that problem? “We demand more than we’re willing to pay for,” is the usual line. Yet that line is deeply misleading

First of all, who is this “we” of whom people speak? Bear in mind that the drive to cut taxes largely benefited a small minority of Americans: 39 percent of the benefits of making the Bush tax cuts permanent would go to the richest 1 percent of the population.

Wasn’t my first choice of which tax to cut to support the private sector. I’d have cut fica taxes and i continue to propose that.

And bear in mind, also, that taxes have lagged behind spending partly thanks to a deliberate political strategy, that of “starve the beast”: conservatives have deliberately deprived the government of revenue in an attempt to force the spending cuts they now insist are necessary.

And liberals have artificially constrained themselves with the misguided notion that spending is operationally constrained by revenues, and fail to understand the ‘right sized’ deficit is the one that coincides with full employment and desired price stability.

Meanwhile, when you look under the hood of those troubling long-run budget projections, you discover that they’re not driven by some generalized problem of overspending. Instead, they largely reflect just one thing:

An understanding of national income account and monetary operations shows deficits are driven by ‘savings desires’ and any proactive attempt to increase deficits beyond savings desires results in inflation.

the assumption that health care costs will rise in the future as they have in the past. This tells us that the key to our fiscal future is improving the efficiency of our health care system — which is, you may recall, something the Obama administration has been trying to do, even as many of the same people now warning about the evils of deficits cried “Death panels!”

Wrong causation. What he calls our ‘fiscal future’ is the size of future deficits and they will always reflect future ‘savings desires.’ if we proactively get them smaller than that the evidence will always be unemployment.

So while cutting health care costs may be a ‘good thing,’ when the time comes, future deficits need to reflect future savings desires to keep us fully employed.

So here’s the reality:

The mistaken, political reality.

America’s fiscal outlook over the next few years isn’t bad. We do have a serious long-run budget problem,

Unfortunately, this kind of talk makes him part of the problem, not part of the answer.

which will have to be resolved with a combination of health care reform and other measures, probably including a moderate rise in taxes.

Wonderful, with screaming shortfall in aggregate demand as evidenced by tragic levels of unemployment, the celebrity voice from the left is calling for spending cuts and tax hikes not to cool an over heating economy, but to reduce non govt savings of financial assets.

(govt deficit = non govt savings of financial assets to the penny as a matter of national income accounting, etc)

But we should ignore those who pretend to be concerned with fiscal responsibility, but whose real goal is to dismantle the welfare state — and are trying to use crises elsewhere to frighten us into giving them what they want.

This is one of the current iteration of the ‘deficit dove’ position.

It does not cut it.

It is part of the problem, not part of the answer.

Doing the best i can to get the word out.

Please distribute to the max!

re: Trichet statement

The old german model was tight fiscal to keep domestic demand down, costs down, to help exporters. this made the mark strong so they sold marks vs dollars to keep it weak at the expense of the macro economy but to the benefit of the exporters.

The euro zone is trying same but can’t buy dollars for ideological reasons- it would look like the dollar is backing the euro as a reserve currency, etc.

So the euro gets strong to the point where the export strategy is thwarted. Hence it went up to 160 to the dollar before it all broke down and ‘automatic’ counter cyclical deficits kicked in which weakened the euro, which they are now trying to reverse with austerity. But going broke trying, etc.

From Pragmatic Capitalist: