Payrolls and a Fed rant

Utter failure of policy.

The Fed was certain it knew what Japan had done wrong and wasn’t going to make THOSE mistakes.

So it

Cut rates much more aggressively.

Said it would do whatever it takes.

Figured out how to do its job as liquidity provider after only 6 months of alphabet soup programs.

Did heaps of Quantitative Easing.

Did the twist.

And now, realizing its done about all it can do, says monetary policy can’t do it all.

And still fails to recognize publicly the actual problem is the budget deficit is way too small.

And doesn’t directly inform Congress that

there is no such thing as a solvency problem,

the Fed controls government interest rates, and not the market,

there is no long term deficit problem with regards to finance,

the only thing we owe China is a bank statement,

Quantitative Easing and rate cuts remove interest income from the economy, which allows the deficit to be that much larger,

etc.

as we continue to go the way of Japan.


Karim writes:

Some improvement around the edges but the larger narrative is employment rising only at a rate fast enough to keep the unemployment rate stable (not higher or lower)

  • NFP 80k with net revisions 102k
  • Unemp rate down to 9% from 9.1%
  • Average hourly earnings 0.2% and aggregate hours 0.1% barely ok for labor income once adjusted for inflation
  • Weather may have played a small role as construction employment turned from +27k to -20k
  • Diffusion index improved from 56.7 to 60.7; while encouraging in that the majority of industries are adding jobs, doesn’t say or mean they are necessarily adding jobs at an increasing rate
  • Other positives are median duration of unemployment falling from 22.2 weeks to 20.8 weeks and U6 measure falling from 16.5% to 16.2%
  • Don’t think this would have a big impact on the new Fed forecasts we saw the other day

President Obama entering the fray

More of the blind leading the blind. The one thing they all agree on, at great expense to global well being, is the budget deficits are all too large and the need for shared sacrifice and all that.

No chance for anything constructive to come out of any of this.

And these masters of their money machines don’t even know how to inflate, as they all desperately try to inflate with their versions of quantitative easing, which, functionally, is just another demand draining tax.

*DJ Merkel, Obama Discussed How To Boost EFSF Firepower Without ECB
*DJ Obama To Merkel: We Are Totally Invested In Your Success – Source
*DJ Geithner, Schaeuble May Meet To Discuss IMF Role In Euro Crisis -Source

The Euro Zone Race to the Bottom

While the symptoms get continuous attention as they get threatening enough, the underlying cause-the austerity- does not.

The euro zone, like most of the world, is failing to meet its further economic objectives because of a lack of aggregate demand.

And in the euro zone, the fundamental problem is that the member nations, as credit sensitive ‘currency users’ are necessarily pro cyclical in a downturn, much like the US states, and therefore incapable of independently meeting their further economic objectives.

So even as the euro zone struggles to address it’s solvency crisis that threatens the union itself as well as at least part of what remains of the global financial architecture, the underlying shortage of euro net financial assets continues to undermine output and employment, with GDP growth now forecast to fall to 0 with a chance of going negative in the current quarter.

What this means is that without adopting an alternative to the current policy of applying enhanced austerity as the means of addressing the solvency issue, it all remains in a very ugly downward spiral with social collapse far less than impossible.

So yes, the solvency issue can continue to be managed by the ECB, the issuer of the euro, continuing to buy national government debt as needed. But that doesn’t add net euro financial assets to the economy. It merely shifts financial assets held by the economy from the debt of the national governments to deposits at the ECB. So it does nothing with regards to output, employment, inflation, etc. as recent history has shown.

In fact, nothing the world’s central banks do adds net financial assets to their economies. And much of what they do actually removes net financial assets from their economies, making things worse. Note that last year the Fed turned over some $79 billion in profits to the Treasury. Those profits came from the economy, having been removed from the economy by the Fed’s policy of quantitative easing, which the old text books rightly used to call a tax.

And meanwhile, the imposed austerity that accompanies the bond purchases does directly alter output and employment- for the worse.

Additionally, for all practical purposes, there is universal global support for austerity as the means supporting global output and employment.

So even if the euro zone gets the solvency issue right, with the ECB writing the check to remove all funding constraints, the ongoing austerity will continue to depress the real economies.

Macro Curve Considerations

By the end of QE2 the curve had adjusted to the Fed having taken out pretty much all of the new supply out to 10 years.

After QE2 the supply out to 10 years started to be replenished auction by auction.

This was quickly followed by twist which began working to remove supply from the long end and add it to the short end.

The net is an ongoing multi trillion shift taking supply out of the long end and adding it to the short end that will continue to be a major influence on spreads.

Additionally, the Fed is seeing no material evidence of any monetary derived inflation, credit expansion, escalating inflation expectations (not that they actually matter), etc. and they are also seeing the global economy gradually slowing, and the euro zone imploding. So higher rates from the Fed remain a highly unlikely scenario.

Early Holiday Cheer…

As discussed last week, the latest euro package just announced is unravelling quickly as markets again realize there is no actual substance, and no operational path with regards to carrying any of it out. So things will deteriorate as described until markets again force further ‘action.’

At the same time, the austerity continues to weaken the euro economies, with Q4 potentially going negative, driving deficits that much higher in the process.

The ‘answer’ remains the ECB writing the check, which they’ve sort of seemed to recognize, but they remain (errantly) concerned that reliance on the ECB is inherently inflationary, and thereby violates the ECB’s mandate for price stability. So it won’t happen until things again get bad enough to force it to happen.

The catastrophic risk remains a failure, when push comes to shove, to allow the ECB to write the check as they have been doing to allow it all to muddle through.

The range of outcomes couldn’t be wider. Write the check and not much happens, don’t write the check and there is unthinkable collapse.

Meanwhile, the 1% running the US looks to be trying to take the lead in the global austerity race to the bottom as the Democrats in the super committee on deficit reduction have led off by proposing a $4 trillion deficit reduction package.

Toss in West Texas crude prices heading to Brent levels of about $110/barrel as the strategic petroleum reserve release winds down over the next three weeks and the looks to me like the US consumer crawls back into his foxhole just in time for the holiday season.

Not to mention Japan now darning the torpedoes and buying dollars to take back a bit of the export market they lost by kowtowing to former tsy sec paulson’s demands to not be a ‘currency manipulator’ in the context of still weakening global demand in general.

The number one threat to world order remains a failure to sustain demand. The good news is sustaining aggregate demand is a simple matter once the monetary system is understood. The bad news is there seems to be no one of authority who doesn’t have it all backwards.

Valance Weekly Report 10.26.2011

Valance Weekly Report

(To download PDF, right click link and select save link as)

Highlights
US – Consumer Confidence erosion mirroring Europe’s
EU – Business and Consumer Confidence at cycle lows
JN – Exports improve although domestic conditions remain weak
UK – Manufacturers’ optimism dropped sharply
CA – BoC cut its 2011/12 growth forecast
AU – Inflation moderated in Q3
NZ – RBNZ may delay hikes

ECB Capital

I’ve been reading up some on ECB capital.

Seems a minimum capital level for the ECB is not specified.

However, the ECB distributes profits ultimately to the national govts.

And that ECB losses are ultimately the responsibility of the national govts.

That’s why, faced with potential losses, the ECB has required the national central banks to advance additional capital to the ECB.

However, in the event of losses, the ECB is not required to call for capital from its members, but as a matter of policy the ECB has called for capital from its members when it deemed the risk of losses had risen.

So while the ECB, like the Fed, can, operationally, allow its capital to go negative without operational consequence. The ECB, unlike the Fed, looks to keep it’s capital positive by requiring contributions from its members.

This therefore means, for example, that should the ECB realize losses on its Greek bonds, it will demand additional capital from the national central banks/national govs. which will further erode their solvency.

The reason for this seems to be the notion that ECB losses left as negative capital would otherwise be inflationary.

Bill Mitchell on Thomas Sargent and the Nobel Prize

Rewarding those who are culpable

By Bill Mitchell

October 14 — I didn’t comment earlier this week on the recent decision to award the (not)Nobel Prize in Economics to Thomas Sargent. My thoughts were otherwise occupied but it is worth recording that Sargent has been at the centre of the mainstream macroeconomics literature which has been used to justify the claims that government fiscal interventions are ultimately futile and only generate accelerating inflation. His ideas helped my profession to claim authority in its campaign to pressure governments in deregulation, privatisation, inflation targetting and abandoning full employment as a primary policy target. The upshot has been three decades of policy development which really laid the foundations of the current crisis. If Sargent and his cohort had not been so influential the world economy might not have been in the mess that it finds itself in. And … millions might still have their life savings and be gainfully employed. The so-called Nobel Prize in Economics continues to reward those who are culpable.

I covered the event last year – Nobel prize – hardly noble – and noted that the award had nothing to do with Alfred Nobel’s will which wanted prestige to be bestowed on “shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind”. Instead, the economic prize was established in 1968 by the ultra-conservative Swedish central bank and the prize is awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.

There is a good critique of Sargent’s selection by John Cassidy in his New Yorker article (October 12, 2011) – A Nobel for Freshwater Economics. He said:

This week’s announcement of the Nobel Prize in Economics got me thinking about the state of the subject, and my thoughts weren’t very positive. Three years after the great financial crisis of 2008 discredited the ruling orthodoxy in macroeconomics and finance, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has chosen to honor one of the leading creators of that orthodoxy: Tom Sargent, of New York University. And judging from the reactions to the Nobel announcement, most academic economists heartily approved of it.

Trichet comments

As suspected:

*DJ Trichet: No Crisis Of The Euro As A Currency

He looks at the euro as a currency as per the single mandate of price stability.

*DJ Trichet: Euro As Currency Is Evidently Not In Danger

There is no euro crisis as the value of the euro has been reasonably strong.

*DJ Trichet: Fear That Non-Standard Measures Stoke Inflation Totally Unfounded

They are now comfortable that the bond buying is not inflationary as it doesn’t alter actual spending on goods and services (aggregate demand) and in fact the required austerity reduces it.

*DJ Trichet: ECB Still Against Taking Defaulted Govt Bonds As Collateral

Ok, but so far there aren’t any.

*DJ Trichet: ECB Still Against Credit Event

No reason to let any member nation default and be released from their obligations.

*DJ Trichet: Rescue Fund Must Be Operational As Soon As Possible
*DJ Trichet: EFSF Should Be Appropriately Leveraged

Implying ECB involvement as suspected .

*DJ Trichet: Govts Should Be Responsible For Making Safety Nets Work

Which requires they be backstopped by the ECB which dictates austerity in return for said backstopping.

*DJ Trichet: EFSF Shouldn’t Get Banking Licence
*DJ Trichet: Banks Must Shore Up Capital As Soon As Possible
*DJ Trichet: Govts Must Be Ready To Recapitalize Banks If Needed

All of which requires ECB as backstop directly or indirectly.

*DJ Trichet: Need Euro-Zone Fin Min, Executive Branch In Future

Which would be ECB ‘funded’ much like the US Fed/treasury relation.

*DJ Trichet: Crisis Questions Econ, Fincl Strategy Of All Developed Economies
*DJ Trichet: Working Assumption That Govts Will Overcome Crisis
*DJ Trichet: Euro Is Credible, Stable

Again, the value of the euro is telling for the ECB.

Russia Says Close to Final Stage on China Gas Deal

This is what I’ve proposed the US do with Canada and Mexico- long term contracts for oil and nat gas at ‘fair’ prices would stabilize prices and reduce price disruptions and inflation possibilities of all three economies.

Russia says close to final stage on China gas deal

By Gleb Bryanski

October 11 (Bloomberg) — Russia said on Tuesday it was close to the final stage of a huge gas supply deal with China, in what would be a landmark trade agreement between the long-wary neighbours.

A deal to supply the world’s second biggest economy with up to 68 billion cubic metres of Russian gas a year over 30 years has long been delayed over pricing disagreements.

“We are nearing the final stage of work on gas supplies,” said Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, on his first overseas trip since announcing he was ready to reclaim the Russian presidency.

Putin is hoping his two-day visit will help broaden trade with China, which he expects to grow to $200 billion in 2020 from $59.3 billion last year.