Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis |
- How Student Debt Wrecks Marriages, Inhibits Family Formation, and Delays the Housing Recovery
- Pennsylvania Governor Attempts Foolish Bailout of Bankrupt Harrisburg
- Debating the Flat Earth Society about Hyperinflation
How Student Debt Wrecks Marriages, Inhibits Family Formation, and Delays the Housing Recovery Posted: 13 Sep 2010 08:55 PM PDT The New York Times had an interesting article last week on how student debt is affecting family formations. Please consider How Debt Can Destroy a Budding Relationship Nobody likes unpleasant surprises, but when Allison Brooke Eastman's fiancé found out four months ago just how high her student loan debt was, he had a particularly strong reaction: he broke off the engagement within three days.Family Formation a Serious Macro Issue Such stories may make for pretty humorous reading, but this is a serious macro issue. Housing typically leads the economy out of recession. If couples put off marriage, or never get engaged in the first place, that obviously hinders family formation. In turn, that hinders the demand for houses and related goods and services, not to mention the goods and services required to have kids. Moreover, student debt contributes to the problem of unloading a massive inventory of homes and a massive shadow inventory of homes on top of that. Many students are so deep in debt and without a job that not only have they delayed marriage, they have moved back home and are not even renting apartments. Banks sitting on foreclosures thinking that a housing recovery is around the corner, have another thing coming. These structural problems, including boomers headed into retirement wanting to downsize their homes (with no one to sell to), puts additional pressure on home prices. Ironically, falling prices is the cure for this mess, not the problem that politicians see and attempt to fight. Home prices need to drop to affordable levels where there is genuine demand to clear housing inventory. Because of all these factors, I expect housing prices to remain weak for a decade, even after prices bottom. That bottom in housing prices may still be a couple years away (or longer), and the more the Fed and Congress tries to prop up prices, the longer away the bottom is likely to be. Although some localities my be in the process of bottoming now, there is simply no economic reason to rush into buying a house today. Other reasons may prevail. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
Pennsylvania Governor Attempts Foolish Bailout of Bankrupt Harrisburg Posted: 13 Sep 2010 10:27 AM PDT In a move that is sure to backfire, Last-Minute State Aid Helps Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Make Debt Payment The embattled government of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania's capital, will avoid default on a $3.3 million bond payment this week because of $4.4 million in last-minute state aid. Of the last-minute state aid, half a million dollars are considered a loan and must be repaid.Mayor Linda Thompson is a fool as is Governor Ed Rendell. Harrisburg is bankrupt. Period. Wasting 10's of millions of dollars will not change that simple fact. Harrisburg would be much further ahead had it skipped bond payments years ago. Now that is money down the drain. Harrisburg cannot afford a $500,000 loan from the state to pay bills it should not pay. It has no means of making the next bond payment. While cutting city services may be a good thing to do, cutting city services to pay bondholders, when city residents get nothing out of it but higher taxes is point blank stupid. There is no deal to work out with the bondholders other than default and bankruptcy court. Governor Ed Rendell is acting in the interests of the bondholders not in the interests of Harrisburg. The move is so foolish I have to wonder what the governor's connection to the bondholders is. The city council should reject this offer. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
Debating the Flat Earth Society about Hyperinflation Posted: 13 Sep 2010 03:32 AM PDT Over the past few weeks, many people have asked me to comment on John Hussman's August 23, 2010 post Why Quantitative Easing is Likely to Trigger a Collapse of the U.S. Dollar. Most wanted to know how that article changed my view regarding deflation. It didn't. Several others went so far as to tell me that Hussman was calling for hyperinflation. They were point blank wrong. Here is the pertinent section from Hussman's September 6, 2010 post The Recognition Window. A note on quantitative easingIn the Octagon Some of the arguments that people have recently presented for hyperinflation are so silly they are not worth discussing. Yet, I have been drawn into discussing such arguments because of an unfortunate off-the-cuff statement I made on a recent podcast, and because of a misrepresentation of another statement I made in the same podcast. Zero Hedge writes The Deflation vs Hyperinflation Debate On Steroids, Or Mish vs Gonzalo Lira In The Octagon A recent guest post by Gonzalo Lira on Zero Hedge, providing a theoretical framework for the arrival of hyperinflation, went viral, generating over 75k views and over 1,000 comments, further confirming that the biggest and most confounding debate in all of finance is what will the final outcome of the Fed's market manipulative actions be: deflation, inflation or, and not really comparable, hyperinflation (which is a distinctly different phenomenon from either of the above). The post infuriated some hard core deflationists who continue to refuse to acknowledge the possibility that in its attempt to inspire inflation at all costs, the Fed may just push beyond the tipping point of monetary imprudence away from mere target 2-3% inflation, and create an outright debasement of the world's reserve currency.Hyperinflation Ends The Game Actually what I said is "Hyperinflation Ends The Game" NOT as Zero Hedge stated "Hyperinflation is the endgame". The difference between those phrases is enormous. In the podcast I was asked about a guest post by Gonzalo Lira on Zero Hedge. I had seen the article and I made an off-the-cuff statement that the post was so silly it was not worth commenting on. How Hyperinflation Starts According to Lira Please consider the following snip as to how hyperinflation starts according to Gonzalo Lira. So this is how hyperinflation will happen:Debating the Flat Earth Society Supposedly ... A slight rise in oil will cause a "jiggle" in treasury yields. As a result of that jiggle "asset managers will sell Treasuries because, effectively, it's become the principal asset they have to sell." Really? Since when are much despised treasuries the "principal asset" of asset managers? And pray tell, why would the asset managers "have to sell"? Oil at $140 did not start a chain reaction before. Why would a "slight but sudden rise" in commodity prices start such a chain reaction, now? I do not know how anyone could keep reading after those statements, but it goes on and on, getting sillier and sillier about who has to sell what and why, and in turn what the Fed's response will be. One interesting aspect of Lira's post is that I agree with his definition of hyperinflation: a complete loss of faith in currency. Yet, Lira never even discusses how a selloff in treasuries causes a loss of faith in the dollar. However, Lira does go on to say "....That's why I think there'll be hyperinflation in America—that bubble's soon to pop. I'm guessing if it doesn't happen this fall, it'll happen next fall, without question before the end of 2011. " Commenting on the above is tantamount to debating the flat earth society. The premise is so silly it's not worth discussing, yet here I am trapped into discussion by a mischaracterization of my statement "Hyperinflation Ends The Game". How Does Hyperinflation Occur? "FOFOA" hops into the hyperinflation debate with Just Another Hyperinflation Post - Part 1 First of all I would like to clear up probably the most common misconception about hyperinflation. What most people believe is that massive printing of base money (new cash) leads to hyperinflation. No, it's the other way around. Hyperinflation leads to the massive printing of base money (new cash).Zimbabwe vs. Weimar In the case of Zimbabwe, a loss of faith in currency occurred before the printing occurred. The Weimar Republic is a different story. In Zimbabwe, the Mugabe government initiated a "land reform" program intended to correct the inequitable land distribution created by colonial rule. Ultimately, Mugabe's attempt to to bail out the poor at the expense of the wealthy is what triggered capital flight and loss of faith of the currency. His reforms not only caused a flight of capital and human capital (the wealthy), they also led to sanctions by the US and Europe. In response, Mugabe turned on the printing presses but the loss of faith in the currency had already occurred. In Weimar Germany, printing for war reparations kicked off hyperinflation. Wikipedia provides a good accounting in Inflation in the Weimar Republic. It is sometimes argued that Germany had to inflate its currency to pay the war reparations required under the Treaty of Versailles, but this is misleading, because the treaty did not allow payment in German currency. The German currency was relatively stable at about 60 Marks per US Dollar during the first half of 1921.[1]Hyperinflation is a Political Event The commonality between Zimbabwe and Weimar is they are both political events. In Zimbabwe a political event triggered capital flight, in Weimar a political event started massive printing, triggering hyperinflation. Interestingly, FOFOA's commentary seriously weakens the hyperinflation case once one dives into the politics of the cause. Can The Fed Cause Hyperinflation? I do not think the Fed can cause hyperinflation and more importantly I am sure they would not if they could. The reason is "Hyperinflation Would End The Game"
That is what I meant by it would "end the game" and that is why the banks, the Fed, the politicians, and the wealthy would not let "the game" progress that far. Fiat World Mathematical Model The above addresses the question of "Would the Fed Cause Hyperinflation?" "Could the Fed cause hyperinflation?" is a different question. I have my doubts. To understand how powerless the Fed is, one needs to understand the difference between credit and money, how much the former dwarfs the latter, and what the Fed's role is in getting banks to lend. I discussed those ideas in Fiat World Mathematical Model. Unlike Congress, the Fed has no power to give money away. Nor would they do so if they could. By the way, I did see Quantitative Easing, ZIRP, and various Keynesian silliness in advance and stated they would not work. October 30, 2008: ZIRP Coming To Fed? ZIRP did not help Japan and it will not help US banks either. In fact, the rate cuts appear to be counterproductive. However, one cannot rule out the Fed cutting rates to 0% anyway. Bernanke is in academic wonderland and appears to be hell bent on sticking with his models regardless of how poorly those models perform in actual practice.March 06, 2009: Groping In The Dark' With Quantitative Easing Excuse me but has anyone looked at the success rate of Bernanke's quick slash of interest rates from 5.25 to 0 and the fast $trillions Congress, Paulson, Geithner and Obama have thrown down various black holes?January 02, 2009: How "Something For Nothing" Ideas Become Policy Bernanke Correctly Judged NothingContained Depression I agree with Hussman that Quantitative Easing will not cause hyperinflation. Nor will "jiggling" of treasury yields, nor would a "slight but sudden blip" in commodity prices, nor would another $1 trillion stimulus effort. Kevin Feltes and David Levy, economists for the Jerome Levy Forecasting Center, have come to the same conclusion. For an discussion of ideas from the Jerome Levy Forecasting Center, please see "Contained Depression" For Now, It's Deflation For a full discussion of where we are today please see Are we "Trending Towards Deflation" or in It? Unlike hyperinflation, deflation does not "end the game" (destroy the currency). The Great Depression and Japan both provide proof enough. Given that hyperinflation is a complete loss of faith in currency, tangible goods, any tangible goods must by definition rise exponentially in such a situation. Yet amazingly many hyperinflationists are bearish on housing. Hyperinflation accompanied by a housing collapse is simply impossible - by definition. What Could Cause Hyperinflation? As noted above, the Quantitative Easing will not cause hyperinflation. Moreover, it is doubtful the Fed can cause it at all. The Fed cannot give money away nor can the Fed force banks to lend or consumers to borrow. Those who disagree must still address the difference between theory and practice. Unlike the Fed, Congress could give money away. I do not know if giving everyone in the US $60,000 would do it or not, but announcing a plan to give everyone $60,000 a month indefinitely would sure do it. How likely is that? The answer is 0%. Congress struggles right now extending unemployment insurance. There is little political will for more stimulus. The next Congress is a guaranteed bet to be more conservative. To be sure, more stimulus and more Quantitative Easing are coming but the latter does not matter and the former will be in insufficient quantity. Theory vs. Practice Please note that banks do not want hyperinflation or even massive inflation. The reason is simple: Banks will not want to be paid back with cheaper dollars, especially worthless dollars, and Congress is beholden to itself and the banks. Hyperinflation could theoretically come from massive sustained political will to bail out the little guy at the expense of the banks, the wealthy, and the political class. However, unlike Mugabe and Zimbabwe, neither the banks nor the Fed nor the political class wants to bail out the poor at the expense of the wealthy. Indeed, Bernanke's, Paulson's, and Geithner's actions to date have done the exact opposite! We have bailed out the banks at the expense of the ordinary taxpayer (keeping the little guy in debt). This is what it comes down to: In theory, Congress can easily cause hyperinflation. In practice, they won't, and neither will the Fed. As Yogi Berra once quipped "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." 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 |