Interview Link
[top]
I agree, and the deficit of consequence isn’t that high as I think that figure includes the TARP funds
which were a form of regulatory forbearance and not spending.
Unfortunately, elsewhere he falls short in explaining why deficit spending doesn’t have the downside risks the mainstream attributes to it.
Send him a copy of the 7 deadly innocent frauds draft for comment? (attached)
Richard Koo: a personal view of the macroeconomy
US a mirror image of Japan 15 years ago
In the last two weeks, I made my annual fact-finding mission to
Washington and also spent time in Boston and San Francisco. What I
witnessed was very reminiscent of the situation in Japan 15 years ago:
people were latching on to isolated fragments of good economic news as
evidence of recovery while ignoring the steady deterioration in the real
economy.
In addition to meetings with officials from the Federal Reserve and the
White House, I had the opportunity to talk with various groups at the
Hill including two Congresspersons over lunch.
Although there have been signs of improvement in the real economy,
particularly in production, the problems in the jobs picture are
underscored by the unemployment rate’s rise into double digits.
And on a personal level, the San Francisco bank that my parents
patronized for many years was shut down by the FDIC last Friday. To
prevent panic, the bank opened for business as usual on Saturday under
the name of another lender. This event added a personal dimension to the
crisis for me.
Budget deficit concerns make new fiscal stimulus all but impossible
One issue of particular concern on this trip was that people seem to be
paying little attention to the economic impact of the Obama
administration’s fiscal stimulus and instead are focusing entirely on
the size of the resulting budget deficit.
With the government running a deficit equal to 10% of nominal GDP, more
people are looking at the continued weakness in the economy:
particularly in employment: and drawing the conclusion that the
administration’s policies are ineffective and should be discontinued as
soon as possible. This view is so strong that additional fiscal stimulus
is seen as being almost impossible to implement today.
This pattern mirrors events in Japan 15 years ago. The more the
government draws on fiscal stimulus to avert a crisis, the more
criticism it receives.
People are giving no thought to the economic consequences if the
government had not responded to the $10trn loss in national wealth (in
the form of housing and stock portfolios) with fiscal stimulus. Instead,
they focus entirely on the fact that the economy has yet to improve
despite $787bn in expenditures.
In Japan, fiscal spending succeeded in keeping GDP above bubble-peak
levels despite the loss of Y1,500trn in national wealth, or three years
of GDP, from real estate and stocks alone. But because disaster was
averted, people forgot they were in the midst of a crisis and rushed to
criticize the size of the resulting fiscal deficits.
Their criticism prevented the Japanese government from providing a
steady stream of stimulus. Instead, it was forced to adopt a stop-and-go
policy of intermittent stimulus: each time a spending package expired,
the economy would weaken, forcing the government to quickly implement
the next round of stimulus. That is the main reason why the recession
lasted 15 years. And the mood in Washington today is very similar.
R. Koo
[top]
Headlines all negative today. Â
Soft prices indicate soft demand.
Weakness and calls for deficit cuts heightens stresses on vulnerable national govt finances.
The eurozone remains the one part of the world with systemic risk built into its institutional structure. Â
Highlights:
German October Consumer Prices Unexpectedly Decline
German Investor Confidence Drops in November on Weaker Outlook
Germany to Observe EU Call for Deficit Cuts, Schaeuble Says
French Economic Recovery Probably Strengthened in Third Quarter
Italian Industrial Output Fell More Than Forecast in September
EU to Give Spain Extra Year to Trim Budget Deficit, ABC Reports
[top]
Translation: Â China threatens to liquidate it’s dollars to keep the dollar weak so China can peg to it and increase global exports???Â
China hopes U.S. keeps deficit to appropriate size
(Reuters) – China hopes that the United States will keep its deficit to an appropriate size to ensure basic stability in the U.S. dollar exchange rate, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said on Sunday.
“We have seen some signs of recovery in the U.S. economy … I hope that as the largest economy in the world and an issuing country of a major reserve currency, the United States will effectively discharge its responsibilities,” Wen told a news conference in Egypt.
“Most importantly, we hope the United States will keep an appropriate size to its deficit so that there will be basic stability in the exchange rate, and that is conducive to stability and the recovery of the global economy,” he added.
The premier had expressed concern in March that massive U.S. deficit spending and near-zero interest rates would erode the value of China’s huge U.S. bond holdings.
China is the biggest holder of U.S. government debt and has invested an estimated 70 percent of its more than $2 trillion stockpile of foreign exchange reserves, the world’s largest, in dollar assets.
“I follow very closely Chinese holdings of U.S. assets because that constitutes a very important part of our national wealth. Our consistent principle when it comes to foreign exchange reserves is to ensure the safety, liquidity and good value of the reserves,” Wen said.
[top]
Well stated!
*Not house view.
Since March I have been arguing that the world was a better place than people thought. I am now shifting my core view, which still might take several months to develop in the marketplace.
Skipping to the Conclusions
1. Deflation will be the surprise theme of 2010, when Congress will go into a pre-election deadlock; elections have only underscored this is the public direction
2. Excess Reserves will neither generate new lending nor generate inflation; actually, the quantity of reserves (M0) basically has no real economic effect
3. ZIRP and QE actually CONTRIBUTE to the deflation mostly by depriving the spending public of much-needed coupon income
4. When Federal Tax Rates increase in 2011 this problem will become even more severe
5. The overall level of public indebtedness (vs GDP) will not put upward pressure on yields in this backdrop and there will be a reckoning in the high-rates/deficit hawk community
6. Strong possibility that QE will actually be upsized next year rather than ended when the Fed observes these effects (and this might actually make things WORSE)
The Explanation (a Journey)
It seemed fairly intuitive and obvious for thousands of years that the Earth was at rest and the Sun moving around it. Likewise, it has seemed that the Fed controls the money supply, balances the economy by setting interest rates and fixing reserves which power bank lending, that more Fed money means less buying power per dollar (inflation), that the federal government needs to borrow this same money from The People in order to be able to spend, and that it needs to grow its way out of its debt burden or risks fiscal insolvency. I have, in just a fortnight, been COMPLETELY disabused of all these well-entrenched notions. Starting from the beginning, here is how I now think it works:
1. The first dollar is created when Treasury gives it to someone in exchange for something ammo, a bridge, labor. It is a coupon. In exchange for your bridge, here is something you or anyone you trade it with can give me back to cover your taxes. In the mean time, it goes from person A to person B, gets deposited in a bank, which then deposits it at the Fed, which then records the whole thing in a giant spreadsheet. Liability: One overnight reserve/demand deposit/tax coupon. Asset: IOU from Treasury general account. Tax day comes, Person A pulls his deposit, cashes in the coupon, the Treasury scraps it, and POOF, everything is back to even.
2. For various reasons (either a gold-standard relic or a conscious power restraint, depending who you ask), we make the Treasury cover its shortfall at the Fed and SWAP one type of tax-coupon (a deposit or reserve) for another by selling a Treasury note. Either the Fed (in the absence of enough reserves well get to this) or a Bank (to earn risk-free interest) or Person A (who sets a price for his need to save) is forced out his demand deposit dollar and into a treasury note at the auction clearing price. What about the fact that treasuries aren’t fungible like currency? On an overnight basis, that doesn’t really constrain anyones behavior. A reserve or a deposit means you get your money back the next day. Same thing with a treasury. Functionally its cash and wont influence your decision to buy a car. Likewise for the bank. In the overnight duration example, it does NOT affect their term lending decisions if they have more reserves and few overnight bills, or more bills and fewer reserves. Its even possible to imagine a world (W. J.Bryans dream) where the Fed, with its scorekeeping spreadsheet, combines the line-items we call treasuries and reserves.
3. Total public sector dissavings is equal to private sector savings (plus overseas holdings) as a matter of accounting identity. This really means that the only money available to buy treasuries came from government itself (here I am being a bit loose combining Tres+Fed), from its own tax coupons. If there arent enough ready coupons at settlement time for those Treasuries, the Fed MUST supply them by doing a repo (trading deposits/coupons for a treasury by purchasing one themselves at least temporarily). They dont really have a choice in the matter, however, because if the reserves in the banking system didnt cover it, overnight rates would go to the moon. So in setting interest rates they MUST do a recording on their spreadsheet and the Fedwire and shift around some reserve-coupons (usable as cash) for treasury-coupons (usable for savings but functionally identical).
4. Thus monetizing the deficit is actually just the Feds daily recordkeeping combined with its interest rate targetting, just keeping the score in balance. However, duration is real, as only overnight bills are usable as currency, and because people (and pensions!) need savings, they need to be able to pay taxes or trade tax-coupons for goods when they retire, and so there is a price for long-term money known as interest rates. The Fed CAN affect this by settings rates and by shifting between overnight reserves, longer-term treasuries, and cash in circulation. When the Fed does a term repo or a coupon sale, they shift around the banking and private sectors duration, trading overnight coupons for longer-term ones as needed to keep the balance in order.
5. But all this activity doesnt influence the real economy or even the amount of money out there. The amount of money out there dictates the recordkeeping that the Fed must do.
6. This is where QE comes in to play. In QE, aside from its usual recordkeeping activities, the Fed converts overnight reserves into treasuries, forcing the private sector out of its savings and into cash. This is just a large-scale version of the coupon-passes it needed to do all along. Again, they force people out of treasuries and into cash and reserves.
7. The private sector is net saving, by definition. It has saved everything the Treasury ever spent, in cash and in treasuries and in deposits. In fact, Treasuries outstanding plus cash in circulation plus reserves are just the tangible record of the cumulative deficit spending, also by IDENTITY.
8. So when QE is going on, there is some combination of savers getting fewer coupons which constrains their aggregate demand just like a lower social security check would, and banks being forced out of duration instruments and into cash reserves. I do not think this makes them lend more their lending decision was not a function of their cashflow but rather a function of their capital and the opportunities out there (even when you judge a banks asset/equity capital ratio, there is no duration in accounting, so a reserve asset and a treasury asset both cost the same). If they had the capital and the opportunities, they would keep lending and force the Fed to give them the cash (via coupon passes and repos, which we then wouldnt call QE but rather preventing overnight rates from going to infinity). As far as I can tell, excess reserves is a meaningless operational overhang that has no impact on the economy or prices. The Fed is actually powering rates (cost of money) not supply (amount of money) which is coming from everyone else in the economy (Tres spending and private loan demand).
9. Ill grant there is a psychological component to inflation phenomenon, as well as a preponderance of ignorance about what reserves are, and that might result in some type of inflationary event in another universe, but not in the one we are in where interest rates are low and taxes are going up and the demand for savings is therefore rising rather than falling.
10. One can now retell history through this better lens. Big surpluses in 97-01, then a big tax cut in 03. Big surpluses in 27-30, then a huge deficit in 40-41. Was an aging Japanese public shocked into its savings rate or is that savings just the record of the recessionary deficit spending that came after 97? It will be interesting to watch what happens there as the demographic story forces households to live moreso off JGB income will this force the BOJ to push rates higher or will they never get it and force the deflation deeper?
11. There are, as always mitigating factors. Unlike in the Japan example, a huge chunk of US fixed income is held abroad, so lower rates are depriving less exported coupon income which is actually a benefit. There is of course some benefit from lower private sector borrowing rates as well MEW, lower startup costs for new capital investment, etc. Also, even if one denies that higher debt/gdp ratios are what weakened it (rather than Chinas decisions again something unavailable to Japan), the dollar IS weaker now which is inflationary. But this is all more than offset, I think, by ppls expectation that higher taxes are coming, and thats hugely deflationary and curbs aggregate demand via multiple channels.
12. Additionally, there seems to be a finite amount of political capital that can be spent via the deficit, and that amount seems to be rapidly running out. See https://portal.gs.com/gs/portal/home/fdh/?st=1&d=8055164. The period of deficit stimulus is mostly behind us. Instead, people are depending upon ZIRP and the Fed to stimulate the economy, and in fact there is marginal, and possible negative, stimulation coming from that channel. The Fed is taking away the social security checks knowns as coupon interest.
13. Finally, there is a huge caveat that I cant get around, which is whether we are measuring inflation correctly. It happens that I don’t think we are strange effects like declining inventory will provide upward pressure and lagged-accounting for rents providing downward pressure in the CPI. This is an unfortunate, untradeable fact about the universe that I think will be offset by other indicators (Core PCE) sending a better signal. But this is part of the reason this whole story will take time to develop in the marketplace. As a massive importer of goods and exporter of debts we are not quite Japan, but the path of misunderstanding is remarkably similar.
* Credit due Warren Mosler and moslereconomics.com for guiding my logic.
J. J. Lando
[top]
tightening up—not good.
NEWS FROM GREECE: LARGEST FIRMS TO BE HIT WITH TAX SURCHARGE
*GREECE ONE-TIME COMPANY CHARGE ON 2008 PROFITS
*GREECE TO IMPOSE 10% CHARGE ON COMPANIES WITH OVER 25 MLN PRFIT
*GREECE PLANS TO RAISE EU870 MLN FROM COMPANY ONE-TIME CHARGE
*GREECE TO IMPOSE 7% CHARGE ON COMPANIES WITH PROFIT 10-25MLN
*GREECE TO IMPOSE 5% CHARGE ON COMPANIES WITH PROFIT 5MLN -10MLN
*GREECE TO FINANCE SOLIDARITY PAYMENT WITH ONE-OFF MEASURES
*GREECE’S PAPACONSTANTINOU SPEAKS IN ATHENS
*GREECE TO IMPOSE ONE-OFF CHARGE ON 300 BIGGEST COMPANIES
*GREEK FINANCE MINISTER SPEAKS TO REPORTERS IN ATHENS
*GREECE PLANS TO PAY EU1BLN IN SOLIDARITY PAYMENT TO 2.5 MLN
*GREECE PLANS ONE-OFF MEASURES TO RAISE FUNDS
[top]
Food Stamps Will Feed Half Of US Kids, Study Says
We are going in a direction that is dark and ominous.
It’s part of the brewing populist revolt the media is dismissing.
The majority of Americans believe the nation is going in the wrong direction.
And now the administration is saying unemployment will stay high for a long time and is not even attempting to even propose any decisive remedial action.
Fiscal adjustment is off the table because they think they are ‘out of money’ while they wait for the Fed not knowing its tools are incapable of restoring demand.
[top]
This is a ridiculous notion that further shows there is no understanding of the monetary system at the highest levels, or the ‘debt’ per se would not be a concern. They obviously don’t understand taxes function to regulate aggregate demand (spending) and not to raise revenue per se.
Reminds me of a story Phil Harvey used to tell about sending 100 dogs into a room with 95 bones in it.
5 dogs don’t get bones.
The sociologists and micro economists examine them, and find that the 5 least intelligent, least aggressive etc. dogs didn’t get bones.
So they train those 5 dogs and repeat the experiment, and this time those dogs do get bones.
Of course, 5 others don’t, because the bone shortage is a macro problem.
Same with unemployment.
The problem is a lack of funding for paid jobs because people would rather save their incomes than spend them on goods and services that require labor to produce.
Short of trying to figure out how to get the population to spend by going deeper into debt (reduce savings) which is about as impossible as it is undesirable, the only solution is to cut taxes or increase govt. spending to provide the needed funding.
If this misunderstanding continues, look for high unemployment, a deflationary backdrop, and the Fed on hold until something changes to reduce the output gap.
Obama Says U.S. Must Reduce Debt, Spur Job Growth
By Kate Andersen Brower
Nov. 2 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said the U.S. economy has pulled “back from the brink†and the government must now “get serious†about reducing debt and helping spur job growth.
Addressing a panel of business and labor leaders and economists, the president said it will require “bold, innovative action†on the part of the government and private industry to bring the unemployment rate down and lay the foundation for future growth.
“We just are not where we need to be yet,†Obama told his Economic Recovery Advisory Board, headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. Along with helping spur job growth, “The government is going to have to get serious about reducing our debt levels.â€
This was the second time the full board has met to brief the president on ways to create jobs and encourage economic growth. Obama formed the advisory panel in February to provide an “independent voice on economic issues.†Today’s meeting is focusing on creating jobs through innovation.
Along with Volcker, board members include former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman William Donaldson; Robert Wolf, chairman and chief executive officer of UBS Americas; Penny Pritzker, who led Obama’s campaign fundraising effort and is chairman of Pritzker Realty Group; Jeffrey Immelt the chief executive of General Electric Co.; Caterpillar Inc. Chief Executive OfficerJim Owens; and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.
[top]
A bit disorganized, but these are my impressions as of month end.
(Look for the usual couple of days or so of month end allocations driving the technicals.)
I don’t see much to get encouraged about on almost all of these charts.
In general, demand was trending lower since maybe mid 2006, took a sharp dip in mid 2008 with the great Mike Masters Inventory Liquidation that ended in late Dec 2008, after which the rate of decline stopped accelerating (second derivative change), and now were are, for the most part, back on the ‘trend line’ of the slow decline in demand that started in mid 2006.
Personal income looks very weak, hurt by falling interest income as previously discussed. The clunker lift has reversed, and housing remains very week with no real signs of recovery yet. (about 2% of GDP was clunkers and inventories)
The deficit got large enough due to the automatic stabilizers around year end, market functioning returned as the Fed eventually accepted enough different kinds of collateral from its banks to adequately fund them. (should have been lending unsecured to its member banks all along, etc.)
But while the Obama fiscal package added some demand, and GDP stabilized, the zero interest rate policy continued to shift savings incomes to widening bank net interest margins, and the Fed’s $2 T portfolio began draining another maybe 60 billion a year in private sector interest income. Additionally, interest rates on tsy secs have declined sharply with the Fed rate cuts. (While I fully support a zero rate policy I also recognize the need to sustain demand with a payroll tax holiday, per capita revenue sharing, and an $8/hr fed funded job for anyone willing and able to work.)
And now with productivity higher than real GDP growth, employment continues to fall, though at a lower rate, and capacity utilization in general remains at very low levels. Prices remain very weak, apart from gold, which could be a bubble driven by the misconception that the Fed’s ‘quantitative easing’ policy is inflationary. In fact, it’s nothing but an asset shift that modestly reduces term interest rates at the cost of draining billions in interest income from the private sector.
If gold does turn out to have been a bubble and collapse, it could be highly demoralizing as it would reveal the Fed does not have the tools to ‘reflate’ at will. Dollar shorts could start covering, further taking away the bid from stocks (also as previously discussed). And if the Saudis have left the prices to their refiners below current levels, crude and products will fall as well.
All major foreign govts. seem to be continuing to favor export led growth, which will also keep US domestic demand in check.
And, in general, it looks like most of the world is looking to tighten up fiscal policy, believing in the like of the ‘debt trap’ and also that monetary policy is expansionary and inflationary.
[top]
Diversification became a substitute for credit analysis.
But also, if the deficit gets too small, the economy will implode sufficiently to get the deficit back up through falling tax revenues and rising transfer payments.
So the ‘tougher’ the private sector is, the harder the automatic stabilizers will work to bring it down, no matter how ‘tough’ you make it.