• Countdown to the 2025 QuantNet rankings. Join the list to get the ranking prior to public release!

Mike Whitney on the US economy

What he doesn't realize or seems not to is that the US goes in booms and busts. In the bad times, the government racks up debt to try and keep us humming along without crashing while in the good times we go back to full speed.
 
An end to neliberalism? I've always been a vocal critic of neoliberalism; for a socialist like myself, this has always been just another face of what Lefties like me term "late capitalism": reduced profit margins, intensified economic competition, and a geater emphasis on finance as an end in itself (and divorced from any productive economic activity). One gentle introduction to this kind of thinking can be found in article here by John Bellamy Foster. And another one, also by Foster, over here. But now the FT weighs in:

Yet the problems that began in credit markets a year ago now cast a cloud over the strong market orientation of western policy. After the collapse of banks such as Bear Stearns in the US and Northern Rock in the UK, and against the current background of mounting speculation about the viability of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Anglo-American approach to capitalism appears badly flawed.

Given the global economic slowdown, there will almost certainly be more pump-priming in the advanced economies to the point where fiscal rules designed to restrain big government are broken. The credit crunch has already prompted an involuntary expansion of the role of the state in the shape of bank nationalisations such as that of Northern Rock, where public ownership was reluctantly embraced by a Labour government. The US Treasury may yet find itself in a similar position with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

An interesting question is whether such ad hoc government intervention will be repeated outside the financial sector. The collapse of a big motor manufacturer in Detroit, which the debt markets currently expect, may soon put political expediency into conflict with fiscal probity.

The great majority of people in the English-speaking countries have tolerated stagnant earnings and a high degree of income inequality for many years, largely because they have still been able to raise living standards by borrowing on the security of soaring house prices. With the credit crunch, borrowing is suddenly more difficult and house prices are plunging just as high food and energy prices drive up the cost of living.

... there is understandable resentment that wayward bankers are being bailed out. Such socialism for the rich is unlikely to please electorates in the worst-hit countries.
 
Another piece by Mike Whitney. Okay, okay, he's a bit too pessimistic (even by my standards). And the scenario he depicts of a fire sale of assets to pay debts is not realistic (the US government has the huge advantage that its debts are denominated in its own currency). But his piece does make for a riveting, though not exactly comforting, read. Anyway:

The perception that the dollar is getting stronger is mostly an illusion. Deflation is "dollar positive" because investors who flee from toxic assets naturally move into cash. But that doesn't mean they have faith in the dollar; far from it. The fundamentals for the greenback get worse by the day. Fiscal and trade deficits are out of control, the national debt is tipping $10 trillion, foreign investment is drying up, and confidence in US leadership has never been lower. The dollar is on a time-line of roughly 6 to 18 months before it's rolled into spools and sold as toilet paper. Paper currency is a country's IOU; and foreign central banks are wary of taking checks from a country that no longer wins wars or has the capacity to pay off its debts. That's why, for the first time, there's serious talk about the US losing its triple A rating on government debt. And it could happen sooner than anyone thinks. Every time the Fed uses the dollar to prop up the faltering banking system or provide limitless capital for defunct GSEs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; the dollar comes under greater and greater pressure. At a certain point the dollar will crumble and the country will have to sell off its assets and industries to pay the bills. That's when the private equity vultures and Sovereign Wealth Funds will swoop down and scavenge anything of value for pennies on the dollar.

Two weeks ago, Merrill Lynch sold $30 billion of Mortgage-backed junk for 20 cents on the dollar. But they also financed the deal, which means that they really only got 5 cents on the dollar! This reflects the true "market value" of these assets. They are virtually worthless. Naturally, Merrill's sale sent tremors through Wall Street where banks and other financial institutions are sitting on trillions of dollars of this garbage marking it down at a few percentage points every reporting period rather than doing what Merrill did and putting it all behind them. As a result, the banks have less capital to lend, which means economic activity will continue to slow and the country will go into a deep recession. The point is, that the Federal Reserve now holds about $400 billion of this junk-paper on their balance sheets and the US Treasury is planning to take on hundreds of billions more (perhaps as mush as $800 billion more under the new legislation!) to prop up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Bush administration is using the credibility of the dollar as collateral in its plan to bail out the most reckless, high-stakes Wall Street gamblers and their multi-trillion dollar Ponzi scheme that has blown up in their faces.

So, how does this affect the dollar?

The nation's debts are entirely balanced atop its currency. The greenback is like a circus strongman holding a barbell precariously over his head; as the weight is increased, the sweat begins to appear on his brow while the veins in his neck and forehead begin to bulge. Finally, the knees buckle and the over-matched weightlifter crashes to the canvas in a heap. That's the future of the dollar in a nutshell. Its just a matter of time.

No one knows where the bottom is for gold, but one thing is certain: it's future looks a lot brighter than the dollar's. The Bush administration has yet to demonstrate that it can enforce Dollar Hegemony via military intervention. That is a very big deal indeed. If the dollar isn't backed by Middle East oil, then the $6 trillion stockpile of dollars and dollar-denominated assets that are languishing in foreign central banks and sovereign wealth funds, will continue to dwindle until the dollar's position as "reserve currency" comes to an end.
 
BBW, if my history is correct, then nobody is going to dump American currency because if that happens, it's not just America that's headed down, but the rest of the entire world with it. The great depression was caused by a loss of faith in the American system, and that disaster ripped the first world apart, not just in the states, but even more so in Europe (I believe Germany pre WW2 was almost as bad as Zimbabwe today).

Or, we can do this:

We can achieve energy independence, become an energy exporter, and then default on all of our petrodollar debt, tell them to go screw themselves (meaning goodbye petrodollar economy nations). What will they do? Attack us with a military? Get real.

Nations that hold our debt will not dump our currency since that means they're going down with our ship. Except the thing is, if we achieve energy independence and become an energy exporter, it will probably hurt, but nothing we couldn't get out of.

Russia caused LTCM to go under by defaulting, and look at it now. It got propped up by petrodollars in record time. If worst comes to worst, we simply have better education and become self-sufficient like Americans did when America built itself as a great nation at the turn of the 20th century. Except this time, our second industrial revolution will be more knowledge based.

Capitalism has always worked, BBW. It built this nation from a bunch of colonists into the world's greatest economic and military superpower.

And the whole "can't win wars" thing is BS. You know as well as I do that America has enough munitions to exterminate any enemy several times over, with the only reason it not doing so isn't that it lacks the power, but simply the desire. We have the military hardware.
 
A sobering piece from the NYT:

With mortgage foreclosures throwing hundreds of families out of their homes here each month, dismayed school officials say they are feeling the upheaval: record numbers of students turning up for classes this fall are homeless or poor enough to qualify for free meals.

The office here where parents fill out forms to qualify for subsidized meals has seen a stream of anxious parents this year, often in tears, pleading for the free meals for their children because they do not have 70 cents a day to pay for the reduced-price meals, Ms. Owens said.

"We've had a lot of daddies coming in to say their check doesn't cover like it used to," she said.

I understand the real rate of inflation is currently around 13.5% (versus the official figure of 5.6%, which is completely risible). The parents who are complaining that "their cheque doesn't cover like it used to" should take a look at the "real average weekly earnings graph" at shadowstats.com: if real average weekly earnings were around $275 in 1982, they are now nudging $100 (in 1982 dollars).
 
More good news from Mike Whitney:

On Friday morning, Senator Christopher Dodd, the head of the Senate Banking Committee, was interviewed on ABC’s Good Morning America. Dodd revealed that just hours earlier at an emergency meeting convened by Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, lawmakers were told that, “We’re literally maybe days away from a complete meltdown of our financial system.” Dodd added somberly, that in his three decades of serving in public office, he had “never heard language like this.”

Postscript: found another recent piece by Mike Whitney.
 
Back
Top Bottom