The American Black Hole of Value

Martin Wolf, chief economist of the Financial Times is worried about the Geithner plan, he writes:
The crisis has broken the American social contract: people were free to succeed and to fail, unassisted. Now, in the name of systemic risk, bail-outs have poured staggering sums into the failed institutions that brought the economy down. (...) If this scheme works, a number of the fund managers are going to make vast returns. I fear this is going to convince ordinary Americans that their government is a racket run for the benefit of Wall Street. Now imagine what happens if, after "stress tests" of the country's biggest banks are completed, the government concludes - surprise, surprise! - that it needs to provide more capital. How will it persuade Congress to pay up? The danger is that this scheme will, at best, achieve something not particularly important - making past loans more liquid - at the cost of making harder something that is essential - recapitalising banks.
"Quite frankly, this amounts to robbery of the American people. I don't think it's going to work because I think there'll be a lot of anger about putting the losses so much on the shoulder of the American taxpayer."
"What an awful mess."
In my opinion there was something much more important than Geithner's plan floated this week:
Pushing aside all the epidemically anecdotal sound and fury, what has happened?
Are the Chinese just worried about the sagging value of the $1.4 trillion in U.S. Treasuries they hold or are they really on to something? That's the big question now that China's central banker, Zhou Xiaochuan, has called for the greenback to be jettisoned as the world's dominant currency and replaced by a new type of benchmark controlled by the International Monetary Fund. Zhou made his call in an essay that appeared on the website of People's Bank of China, China's central bank, on Monday. It was clearly timed to make a splash in the run-up to the G20 meeting that starts in London on April 2. Calling the use of the dollar as the world's benchmark currency "a rare special case in history," Zhou urged the "creative reform of the existing international monetary system towards an international reserve currency." Zhou said the reserve currency, managed by the IMF, should be "disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run." Talk about a vote of no confidence on the future of the U.S. economy! Washington PostOf course the moment the US dollar ceases to be the world's reserve currency, the American economy will no longer be able to pay its debts with money it prints in its basement... The jig will up. Meatloaf will take the place of Camembert on many a formerly festive board from that day out.
Pushing aside all the epidemically anecdotal sound and fury, what has happened?
One of the world's most interesting and influential, even seminal, economists, the Peruvian, Hernando de Soto wrote the following article in the Wall Street Journal that gets right to the heart of the present situation:
Today's global crisis -- a loss on paper of more than $50 trillion in stocks, real estate, commodities and operational earnings within 15 months -- cannot be explained only by the default on a meager 7% of subprime mortgages (worth probably no more than $1 trillion) that triggered it. The real villain is the lack of trust in the paper on which they -- and all other assets -- are printed. If we don't restore trust in paper, the next default -- on credit cards or student loans -- will trigger another collapse in paper and bring the world economy to its knees.
If you think about it, everything of value we own travels on property paper. At the beginning of the decade there was about $100 trillion worth of property paper representing tangible goods such as land, buildings, and patents world-wide, and some $170 trillion representing ownership over such semiliquid assets as mortgages, stocks and bonds. Since then, however, aggressive financiers have manufactured what the Bank for International Settlements estimates to be $1 quadrillion worth of new derivatives (mortgage-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations, and credit default swaps) that have flooded the market.
These derivatives are the root of the credit crunch. Why? Unlike all other property paper, derivatives are not required by law to be recorded, continually tracked and tied to the assets they represent. Nobody knows precisely how many there are, where they are, and who is finally accountable for them. Thus, there is widespread fear that potential borrowers and recipients of capital with too many nonperforming derivatives will be unable to repay their loans. As trust in property paper breaks down it sets off a chain reaction, paralyzing credit and investment, which shrinks transactions and leads to a catastrophic drop in employment and in the value of everyone's property.
At the risk of offending Catholic readers everywhere, imagine this "parallel universe", a metaphorical, Saramago-like scenario by which I have chosen to describe through analogy the American financial sector's crisis and by extension the social crisis it brings with it:
One Sunday, all over the world, every Catholic, man woman and child, who takes Holy Communion develops a persistent diarrhea and an unsightly rash.... Health authorities discover that the pathogen causing these ailments is only found in consecrated communion wafers... unconsecrated wafers are found to be harmless, scientific tests determine that the transformation occurs precisely upon the Host's elevation and is not due to faulty storage procedures.Business and the sanctity of property are and have always been America's religion.
Priests all over the world try consecrating other forms of bread, but with the same result: anything any of them consecrates brings on the diarrhea and the rash. The diarrhea and rash are not fatal, but this universal outbreak brings into question all the sacraments of the Church, especially other vital ones of "deferred payment", such as baptism and the forgiveness of sins.
On one hand this rationally inexplicable crisis is taken as the definitive proof of a supreme being, one who actually and unmistakeably intervenes in human affairs, but on the other it also undoubtedly damages the Church's franchise as a credible representative of that being on earth.
Without a viable sacramental role, what would be the status then of the Pope? He would still have the trappings of the office, the "pope-mobile" and the stunning wardrobe, but what of his apostolic authority?
Having proven God's existence, while simultaneously demonstrating his disfavor, would this then lead to mass conversions to Islam or to Pentecostal sects?
What would be its effect on the Italian tourist industry?
The blow-back and knock-on effects of the proven or potential toxicity of the Church's most important assets, its sacraments, might be endless.
In America's case read commercial paper and the dollar for "communion wafers" and POTUS for "Pope" and you get my drift.
America has in a sense committed suicide. Can its stomach be pumped out in time?
Advertisement












And yet that other sage of economics Dr. Doom or Nouriel Roubine generally likes Geithner's plan.
NY Daily News
March 25, 2009 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Roubini has it backwards.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/eds/2009/03/does-roubini-have-it-backwards.php
Care to comment?
March 26, 2009 1:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am a great admirer of professor Roubini, he stood almost alone in warning against the coming crisis and those of us who discovered him early on had the good fortune to gain our own little reputations for prescience by simply piggybacking on his insights.
In an astoundingly short time, he has moved from the relative obscurity of NYU to being a worldwide household name, one whose every word is repeated and whose opinions have moved in the blink of an eye from being considered "provocative" and "contrarian" to being a benchmark, a standard by which economic policy can be measured or judged. The prospect must be dizzying.
At this moment he stands at a crossroads.
Before him beckon professorships at Harvard and MIT, bestselling books, lucrative lecture tours, perhaps even a future cabinet position... in short from being someone orthodoxy recently considered a mere gadfly, he is now a "great man". What does this mean? It means that a great deal of pressure must be coming his way from the "good and the great", people of power and wealth who so recently snubbed him, to join them at the trough, to be part of the club and to play the game with them.
At this point, Nouriel Roubini's evaluation of the Geithner plan can actually affect its success. The success of the plan is going to make some people very rich and save some rich folk from ruin. I think he is wavering, but I have faith that his considerable intelligence will warn him that he has achieved his eminence by telling uncomfortable truths and that influence gained that way can be lost as fast as it is gained.
March 26, 2009 2:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The success of the plan is going to make some people very rich and save some rich folk from ruin."
I wonder about that. Should it do that in any large part? Is the proper end of government involvement to achieve that?
I can see the government doing something to make price discovery more effective in reality, but if the assets are largely imaginary if not gambling instruments and crooked deals, is price discovery what we really need??
March 26, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
And, isn't it interesting that they are sending a bill to the Hill requesting new laws to permit the government to deal with large, systemic, non-bank financial institutions. This would concern AIG and likely Citi and the other big ones that are involved in so many complex issues. Maybe, despite the doomsayers, the pieces are just being put in place to do this the right way, instead of belly flopping into the deep end and creating a major panic.
March 25, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right on, cain.
March 25, 2009 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep the faith.
March 26, 2009 3:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wish you would make an argument instead of hoping others' writing will do it for you.
Feel like summarizing? So far I get that we are destroying value, (although it didn't really exist), that the dollar is at risk, (although T-bills are the main safe haven right now), and that the world is generally ending, or something.
China was making noises about leaving Treasuries but I think they're just looking to renegotiate.
March 25, 2009 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well Tom, I cheerfully admit that I work in a "Talmudic" disputation style, building arguments by quoting eminent "rabbis". However, I did write the metaphor bit about the Pope, which is the centerpiece of my post. The other quotes are to prepare the reader for that metaphor.
I also thought a little Stiglitz and Krugman would soften the reader up for De Soto, who is much more interesting than they are.
What it is all about is the destruction of value. The impression I get is that the USA is cannibalizing itself. The dollar is in great danger, and with it the whole masquerade, but these things don't just happen overnight... until they just happen overnight.
March 26, 2009 2:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is good cannibalism and bad cannibalism. Life is cannibalistic and inheritance feeds the young from the economic body of the dead.
Churning, in my view, is bad. Financialization is usually bad though it can be useful in some cases. Creative destruction happens but might be value-neutral depending on your viewpoint.
Before there can be price discovery there must be value discovery. This applies to the allegedly illiquid assets (or the illiquid and allegedly real assets), and to the larger questions your blog raises. Otherwise we are doing what the market did to create the bubble - valuing things only according to the prices paid by other people recently.
What are our values?
March 26, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Edgar drove on slowly, hunched over the wheel. He knew, vaguely, that in the Second World War the Greek drachma and Hungarian pengo had become utterly worthless. And in the War of the Revolution the shilling of the Continental Congress hadn't been worth, in the British phrase, a Continental damn. But nothing like this had ever happened to the dollar. If the dollar was worthless, everything was worthless. There was a phrase he had heard a number of times, "the end of civilization as we know it." Now he knew what the phrase meant. It meant the end of money."
Pat Frank
C
March 25, 2009 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
David, Too much hyperbole and distortion in those quotes, for me. Yes, the future of US currency is a growing issue, and if China is serious about going to IMF SDR's as a substitute "reserve currency" there would be some dislocations. However, the real question is the US economy and trade balance, with deficit spending by consumers, producers, and government included.
I usually find Stiglitz remarkably agreeable, but in this case "robbery" is misplaced. The robbery already occurred. The question is: Does the Geithner plan make it now worse or better for which parts of the system? I don't have an answer, and I'm highly skeptical, but "robbery" is just too far overboard without further explanation. There does seem to be plenty of room to game the plan, to engage in "rent-seeking" to manipulate the plan. But if the FDIC is going to be on the hook for about the same amount of money anyway, this isn't a new holdup.
March 26, 2009 1:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here is Jeffery Sachs in today's FT:
Frankly I think that bama is Wall Street's "Manchurian Candidate.March 26, 2009 3:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can see why you'd think that. I'm impressed at Sachs, he seems to have really turned around from his role in the 90s (most of what I know is Klein's discussion the The Shock Doctrine). I guess Russia left a deep impression on him. It's also possible he's anti-Obama and thus just trying to badmouth the administration by talking this apparently sane talk.
Geithner and Summers are definitely not doing anything to dispel the notion that they are in the tank for Wall St. I'm not ready to give up on Obama himself. But I am truly concerned that what sounded like great ideas such as the Volcker Advisory Panel have morphed from policy alternatives, to mere focus groups, to complete emptiness, since it was put out there. Where are the competing opinions and ideas Obama claimed would be the moral and intellectual bedrock of his Administration??
March 26, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I usually find Stiglitz remarkably agreeable, but in this case "robbery" is misplaced. The robbery already occurred."
- Well, I think it's well-placed if you accept his premise that the bail-out is a zero-sum game: who eats the losses - the tax-payer or bank creditors? I'm pretty much with him on the idea that every dollar in losses the tax-payer eats is a form of robbery. If derivatives were on an well-regulated exchange, and there was a decent mechanism for liquidating insolvent banks without fire sales of assets, then there would be no need for a bail-out at all.
March 26, 2009 2:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obey, you're not looking at the larger picture, a necessity if you truly want to play "zero sum".
As I've bored you in the past... the investor class was ripped off for trillions of dollars by the borrower class. You have to include that part in your "equation".
future taxpayer + investors + banks + borrowers = 0, more or less.
And again, the ripoff has already happened even if we aren't being whol-istic. Further ripoffs might occur. Meanwhile in ordinary reality where equations are mere abstractions, fear and greed continue to work their entropic magic...
But I agree that a biased price discovery process is not a fair discovery process, and the Geithner plan does have the hallmarks of bias. David mentioned Manchurian Candidate re Obama...
March 26, 2009 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think "robbery" is a bit strong. "Fraud", on the other hand, seems pretty accurate.
March 27, 2009 4:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
David, thanks for the De Soto piece. Had missed this. And a fine papal analogy!
March 26, 2009 3:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are most welcome.
March 26, 2009 6:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
You papal analogy reminded me of the story about when the Philistines stole the Ark of the Covenant A violation 1Sa 5:6-12.
One of the plagues or disorders that was wrought upon the Philistines was
Piles
Serious Hemorrhoids
Fourth degree piles permanently hang down from the anus and you can't push them back inside. They may become extremely swollen and painful if the blood in them clots
It is evident then: if you mess or violate the Covenant that was made with the people, it can become a pain in the .... Butt
March 26, 2009 5:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Resistance,
Those ancient Hebrews were certainly handy with their metaphors, weren't they?
What little comfort can we derive from this crisis?
Well, for one thing it puts paid to the idea of some sort of diabolically clever "capitalist-international" elite that guides mankind's destiny pulling strings from the shadows: the "Davos cum Bilderberg" thing. Obviously any such group would have prevented this Wall Street, Madoff-make-off, which is threatening the whole system. Nobody is minding the store, the American economy is simply a thieves banquet.
We take our comfort where we can.
March 26, 2009 6:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here is a must read:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/25/AR2009032502226_pf.html
March 26, 2009 7:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
What do you take from that except an attack on the Administration in the subtext, by a writer for the AEI?
"totally at sea" is how the leading edge of progress works. That said, moral grounding is essential to avoid chewing off your own tail. I'm not at all clear as to the moral grounding of Geithner, Paulson, and Bernanke, the figures mentioned.
What happens before and after the USA defaults on its debt? I don't know, I'm totally at sea on this.
March 26, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Curious. What's wrong with a black hole? Lots of good stuff inside darkness so philosophers have written. Would we have had a Dante if not for the Black Death? I ask you. Have a heart for all states of the human condition.
March 26, 2009 8:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are black holes and black hole, that's for sure.
March 26, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
The whole mess is really the failure of monetarism. The predictable consequence of leaving the business cycle in the hands of banks.
March 26, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Americans still do not apprehend the danger.
March 26, 2009 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink