Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis |
- Merle Hazard on the European Sovereign Debt Crisis, Lyrics on Spain
- Ten New York City Hospitals May Close Over Governor Cuomo's Proposed Medicaid Cuts; Need for a New Approach
- World Economic Forum Endorses Fraud; Steve Keen Mocks the WEF Report, So Do I; The Purported "Need to Double Credit in 10 Years"
Merle Hazard on the European Sovereign Debt Crisis, Lyrics on Spain Posted: 24 Jan 2011 04:48 PM PST I just received an email from songwriter "Merle Hazard" on the European Sovereign Debt Crisis. Merle writes ... Hi MishClick on the above link to submit lyrics. Here is a YouTube version of the same Spanish Song, as an alternate way to play it in case the PBS site is too slow. YouTube URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoQKDgyAbtk This is a very short song. I expect the rest to be longer and better. I submitted lyrics from my post "Imagine There's No T-Bonds - It's Easy If You Try" Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
Posted: 24 Jan 2011 12:06 PM PST New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has a $10 billion budget gap to fill. Unlike Illinois Governor Pat Quinn, Cuomo does not seek tax hikes. Instead he want to cut graft and untenable spending, especially state agencies and Medicaid spending. Please consider a few snips from Cuomo's State of the State Address. My friends I believe this state is at a crossroads and I believe there are two very different paths this state may down. Certain factors are pushing us down one path - the national economic pressure; the costs of state government that we're currently expending; the dysfunction that the state government has been manifesting and the fact that the people have lost trust in our government.Need for a New Approach That is a welcome speech, especially from a Democrat who won the endorsement of unions. I certainly applaud the Cuomo's reference to 600 state agencies, most of which I am sure are totally useless, if not counterproductive. I also applaud reference to education funding, medicaid and state and local mandates. "We want to try a new approach" said Cuomo. What he should have said is "We need to try a new approach, and we will." Of course the unions did not like the his speech one bit. Public unions always want to raise taxes. It is their number two mission, just after expanding membership. The one thing Cuomo did not address at all regards the need to cutoff defined benefit plans for new public union workers immediately. Sounding Mightily Republican The Suffolk Times said Governor sounded mighty Republican in 'State of the State Address' Local GOP legislators sounded pretty giddy following Wednesday's first "State of the State" address from Democrat Andrew Cuomo. That's due to the newly sworn in governor's liberal use of one word conservatives love to hear: cap.Cuomo Targeting Medicaid Spending The Wall Street Journal reports Cuomo Targeting Medicaid Spending Gov. Andrew Cuomo is aiming to reduce the state's Medicaid spending by billions of dollars, exceeding the size of cuts to the program proposed in past years, according to individuals with knowledge of his budget.Ten NYC Hospitals May Close Over Medicaid Cuts The New York Post reports Gov's Medicaid cuts may kill 10 city hospitals One-third of New York City's private hospitals could lose their life support and shut down if Gov. Cuomo goes through with his vow to cut between $2 billion and $3 billion from the state's massive Medicaid program, The Post has learned.Economic Impact Cuomo's approach is the correct one, regardless of how many complaints there are. If states do not have the money, and taxpayers do not have the money (and neither does), then something has to give. With that in mind, ponder the number of jobs that will be lost if ten hospitals in New York City close. Factor in numerous other cities that will also be affected. Next think of 600 state agencies and how many of those should be eliminated. However, regardless of short-term impacts, the long-term benefits of such actions will be hugely positive. Eliminating waste will put more money in the hands of taxpayers instead of the hands of bureaucrats who will squander it and public unions who certainly do not deserve it. Unfortunately, public unions and advocates for useless pet projects will not give up their turf easily. Addendum: My friend "TW" responded with some interesting observations. Cuomo failed to point out out that "Obamacare" dumped more Medicaid costs on the states. Thus the true cost of healthcare went up, even if the federal share went down (something that is alleged but certainly not proven).Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
Posted: 24 Jan 2011 02:24 AM PST A few days ago I received an email from the World Economic Forum regarding a need to double credit over the next 10 years. Here is that email. New York, USA, 18 January 2011 – Credit levels will need to double over the next 10 years, growing by US$ 103 trillion, to support consensus-projected economic growth. This doubling of credit could be achieved without increasing the risk of major crisis, finds More Credit with Fewer Crises: Responsibly Meeting the World's Growing Demand for Credit, a report released by the World Economic Forum in collaboration with McKinsey & Company. The study develops a detailed global credit model using historical credit volumes and forecasting potential credit demand to 2020 across 79 countries, representing 99% of world credit volume. The study applies a sustainability methodology to the projected credit demand, using newly developed metrics to answer the following two questions: Will credit growth be sufficient to meet demand? Is there a risk of future credit crises and, if so, where?The accompanying PDF entitled More Credit with Fewer Crises is 84 pages of economic claptrap. The main mission of the World Economic Forum appears to cram more credit down the throats of a world so stuffed with credit it cannot possibly be paid back. Australian economist Steve Keen found three major flaws in the report. There are many others. Inquiring minds will certainly want to read Keen's WEF-mocking analysis entitled How I learnt to stop worrying and love The Bank. The three flaws Keen spotted are:
There are numerous other flaws that I will touch on below. A Not-So Robust Study The WEF brags "To create a robust fact base for the study, a detailed global credit model was constructed to map credit volumes between 2000 and 2009, and to project potential credit demand to 2020. The model spans 79 countries representing 99% of world credit volume." I would specifically like to point out the absurdity of calling a study "robust" that only encompasses only the last 10 years, ignoring the great depression, WWI, WWII, the Great Society, the rise and fall of unions, the effects of baby boomers moving through the economy, and the move from one to two wage earners in a family. Debt Slaves and the Expansion of Credit I also point out the study does not mention Bretton-Woods, Nixon closing the gold window, or how wealth has become increasingly concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people, while those in debt have become debt slaves for life. It's important to understand that rampant credit expansion is in and of itself inflation. My precise definition is "Inflation is a net expansion of money and credit, with credit marked-to-market. The primary beneficiaries of "inflation" are those with first access to credit: banks, government, and the wealthy. By the time credit filters down to those lowest on the totem pole, those who take credit are screwed. The housing bubble is proof enough. Credit bubbles pop, they always do. Thus, the idea that the WEF can put in place procedures to identify bubbles while openly promoting the doubling of credit is simply preposterous. First let's discuss the proper starting point for analysis. Fractional Reserve Lending Is Fraud Here are two easy to read, free online books that make the case. Here are hardcopy versions you can order.
If you haven't read them, read them. If you have read them, read them again. Then meet with your legislative representatives and get them to read the books. Better yet, buy them a hardcopy so you can be sure of it. Fraud aside, let's move on to a discussion of blatant errors in the report. Sustainable Credit Growth The WEF says "Between 2000 and 2009, the world economy was growing at a healthy rate – at 5.3% annually in nominal terms, or 2.2% in real terms. The rate of GDP growth between 2000 and 2008 was 6.2% nominal and 2.8% real. This means that the world's stock of credit outpaced GDP growth by less than 2 percentage points a year – not a wide margin. In theory, there is nothing unsustainable about this picture: as long as credit grows broadly in line with economic growth, the credit is put to good use and borrowers can meet interest obligations and repay principal." Have you ever seen a chart of what 2% compounded looks like? Here is a chart of Bernanke's 2% inflation targeting. Note that 2% can represent 2% excess credit growth or anything else. Inflation Targeting at 2% a Year click on chart for sharper image. Many bad things can happen with Bernanke's 2% inflation target.
By the way, note the WEF thinks 2% credit expansion in excess of GDP is acceptable. Let's assume 4% annualized GDP growth and plot 6% annualized credit expansion. Credit Expansion at 6% Per Year Wages vs. Credit Expansion At 6% per year credit expansion, credit is up 50% in 8 years, 100% in 13 years, and 200% in 20 years. Did after-tax wages go up by 50% in the last 8 years? Did after-tax wages go up 100% in the last 13 years? We all know the answer to those questions. We also know that although incomes did not increase that fast, property taxes are most assuredly up 100% in the last 13 years (except in capped states) and real wages are negative. Real wages are hugely negative for the bottom 80% of the population. Yet the WEF thinks that credit expansion of 6% is sustainable and it does not fully understand what even happened. WEF Ignores the Wealth Effect and the Price of Credit It's pretty easy to explain what happened: People "felt" wealthy by rising asset prices (homes and the stock market). Credit was granted on the basis of rising asset prices and an asinine belief that home prices will rise forever into the future. Credit expanded but wages did not. Property bubbles resulted from credit priced too cheaply. Failure to discuss the price of credit is of course yet another flaw in the report. Equity and Commodity Prices Already Back in Bubble Territory Amazingly the WEF cannot figure out what happened or that asset prices with the exception of the US housing market are already back in bubble territory. Bear in mind we still have not gotten to Steve Keen's objections to the report. Here we go. Poor Starting Year for the Report Steve Keen mocks the starting year of the report with a nice series of graphs. Keen quips: How could I ever have thought that the growth of credit could have caused the Great Recession, when in fact the growth rate of debt has been negative?Credit a "Human Right"?! Yunas seriously has holes in his head. Credit is not a right. The global housing bubbles are proof enough of what happens when credit is extended to those who are not credit-worthy. Certainly there are countries where there is little or no credit. It might behoove Yunas to figure out why. It's easy to figure out if you think in reverse. What do countries have in common where credit is generally available? Here's your answer.
Fix problems in those areas and credit will likely be available. This next section is in regards to financial sector debt, the second fundamental flaw Keen spots in the report. Why omit financial sector debt?Did you catch that subtle reference to fractional reserve lending? "I frequently get the argument that debt within the financial sector can be netted out to zero, but I think this ignores those two factors above: the creation of additional debt-backed money by the initial loan, and the creation of further debt to the financial sector—most of which has been used to fund asset bubbles rather than productive investment. " I am waiting for Keen to come flat out and explicitly state that Fractional Reserve Lending is fraudulent. He sure hints at it, without saying the words. Indeed, it is fractional reserve lending that is the root of most of the huge credit Ponzi schemes. Speaking of Ponzi schemes, Keen discusses his third objection to the report. Why ignore Ponzi Schemes—and Minsky?Sustainable Credit: A Challenge of Definition (from the report) This study recognized it would be no easy task to come up with a definition of sustainable credit that was both specific enough to be meaningful and broadly accepted by public and private decision-makers. Before attempting a definition, therefore, the study canvassed the question – "What is a sustainable level of credit?" – in interviews with more than 50 industry CEOs, rating agency executives, central bankers, regulators and academics.Interview Bias Note that McKinsey interviewed all the people who benefited from the bubble. CEOs, rating agency executives, central bankers, and regulators all were beneficiaries of the credit expansion. Of course they are going to agree on the need for more of it even if they cannot come up with a precise definition. Report Bias Report bias is even more basic than interview bias. The study's mission seems to be to determine how much credit is needed to achieve desired GDP growth. What if the desired GDP growth is flawed? No Challenge At All I can easily define "sustainable credit" conditions. All it takes is a 100% gold-back dollar and no fractional reserve lending. Heck, abolishing fractional reserve lending alone would do it. Will Credit Growth Meet Demand? I have to laugh at the ridiculous question the report asks: Will Credit Growth Be Sufficient to Meet Demand? In short, there will be significant challenges in channelling credit to where it is needed. In a fractional reserve lending system with credit priced too cheaply and central bankers willing to act as lenders of last resort, the last worry anyone should have is whether credit growth will be sufficient to meet demand. By the way, did you catch the flaw in the question itself? There is unlimited demand for credit if credit is cheap enough. As I pointed out before, the article forgot to address "the price of credit" and that silly question highlights the flaw. Bear in mind that in a deflationary environment the price of credit might have to drop to zero, perhaps even negative, before any credit worthy borrowers want it, but priced right, there will unlimited demand for credit. Report's Absurd Conclusion The financial crisis not only shook the foundations of the world economy, it also suggested to many observers that overall credit levels were unsustainably high and would need to be scaled back. The analysis in this report provides a different perspective: credit demand will grow strongly in the decade ahead, and meeting this demand is not only sustainable in principle, but also essential if the world is to meet its economic development goals. Report Confuses Inflation and Government Spending with Growth Flaws after flaws after flaws mount up. The paragraph above shows the authors do not know the difference between real growth (production and output), vs. "economic development goals" as measured by arbitrary measures of GDP and government spending. Government spending, no matter how ridiculous, adds to GDP by definition. Note that it has taken fed balance sheet expansion by $2 trillion and deficit spending of $1.5 trillion just to get a GDP rising at a 3% clip. Also note that taxpayers bailed out the banks but still hold the debt. That situation holds true in the US, Ireland, and Spain (places where the housing bubble popped). The housing bubble is bursting in Australia right now and will burst in Canada, the UK, and China at some point. Every one of those bubbles was caused by credit expansion yet the report's conclusion is we need more credit. The report's major worry is credit expansion will be insufficient. Summary of Flaws
I have never seen such a collectively pathetic group effort of 50 people since I started this blog six years ago. It appears to have been written in Bizarro-World or some alternate universe where economic laws and common sense run in reverse. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
You are subscribed to email updates from Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 |