“The easiest way for your
children to learn about money is for you not to have any.”
- Katharine
Whitehorn.
Stop the bail-outs, I want to get off. The trouble with flood-gates is
that, once opened, they have a tendency to let the floods through. So along
with the flotsam and jetsam of the banking industry, Detroit has now joined the
queue for “emergency” assistance. The FT’s Lex column recently pointed to the
rich irony of this, given that
“..less than two months ago, six of eight representatives in the
Detroit area voted against the first
iteration of Tarp [the Bush administration’s Troubled Assets Relief Programme].
Only too happy to play a game of chicken with the global financial system by
scoffing at the concept of “too big to fail”, that is precisely the
justification they make for rescuing car manufacturers and the dozens of
suppliers and millions of jobs linked to the Big Three, whose “collapse” would
be unacceptable.”
Economist John
Tamny is similarly sceptical, recalling the words of Ludwig Von Mises that
the entrepreneur who fails to use his capital to the best possible satisfaction
of consumers is “relegated to a place in which his ineptitude no longer hurts
people’s well-being”. Detroit’s so-called Big Three are curiously vestigial
entities – embarrassing, mismanaged throwbacks to the dawn of car-making. And
there can be little doubt that any business (such as General Motors) that has
posted $70 billion in losses over the past four years – versus a current market
capitalisation of just $1.8 billion – is hardly a success story.
President-elect Barack Obama has described US carmakers as “the backbone of
American manufacturing”. This particular backbone has advanced osteoporosis.
Citigroup’s Hans Kullberg
(“Reconstructing America: Why the US Government should turn a blind eye to US
automakers.. and invest in the future”) has written an interesting piece in
which he details the extent of the problems facing the US auto sector, but also
puts forward a strategic alternative simply to shovelling money at them (in the
form of investing into energy and alternative energy infrastructure):
“Every time I see a commercial on
television advertising a “0% APR No-Fees, No-Money Down” loan for a car, I
cringe. The average American household currently owns 2.28 cars – how many of
these are idle ? The days of “buy now and pay later” are over, meaning there’s
no money left to buy cars, meaning there’s no money left to support the auto
industry, meaning there’s no sales revenues to pay absurd pension plans,
meaning there’s no reason for the US Government to extend a lifeline simply to
postpone the inevitable future of a futile auto industry. Although politically
appeasing, to do so would be a disservice to the American taxpayer, which is a
much larger contingent than the 2 million or so odd jobs that would be saved.
It’s readily apparent the “modest” loan would be used simply to renegotiate
debt terms which are now trading at 25 cents on the dollar and yielding over
30% a year. To put off the day of reckoning will make the downfall worse when
it finally comes.”
But then, let he who doesn’t need
government money cast the first stone. And the problem with government money is
that in most jurisdictions the very term is a misnomer, because governments too
are already heavily indebted, so it’s taxpayers’ money we’re really
talking about. And this gets us to the heart of the debate: at what tipping
point do effectively unlimited guarantees and capital support by governments start
to become self-defeating, inasmuch as they start to erode belief in the very
instruments (specifically, government bonds, and in due course fiat currency)
from which they are constructed ? Or to put it another way, when does money
start to eat itself ?
It seems to be doing so already.
As economist Willem
Buiter points out, credit default swap spreads (the price of insuring
against a default) have risen for the most seemingly credit-worthy sovereign
entities, including the UK (5 year sovereign CDS at 0.46%), the US (0.33%) and Germany
(0.27%), well above their post-war historical averages. Bloomberg reported that
credit-default swaps on US Treasuries have risen by nearly 40% since TARP was
signed into law in early October, “and are now about the same as Mexican and
Thai government debt before the credit markets began to seize up in June 2007.”
Walter Wriston, former head of
Citibank, famously observed that “countries don’t go out of business” – i.e.,
that countries don’t go bankrupt. That was before all of Latin America effectively
did. And as Nassim Taleb pointed out in ‘The Black Swan’, after sovereign
defaults in Latin America,
“In the summer of 1982, large
American banks lost close to all their past earnings (cumulatively), about
everything they ever made in the history of American banking – everything.”
So systemic banking crises caused
by doltish banking management are more frequent than commonly believed. What is
more common is for banking crises to metastasise into currency crises – and (in
UK Pound Sterling terms alone) we are arguably already there.
It seems perverse to be buying
the US Dollar as a ‘safe haven’ currency given that the US was the epicentre of
the current financial shock. Such is the by-product of being the world’s
reserve currency. But can this really last ? If one concludes that it can’t,
gold is the natural next hedge.
And if the global currency
markets end up becoming as dysfunctional and competitively devalued as, say,
global equity markets are currently, then another perverse outcome of
comparably counter-intuitive inflationary pressure further down the line
would be that rational investors would stockpile equities as a natural
inflation hedge. But we are getting ahead of ourselves. We are only just
entering synchronised global recession. For the immediate future, bracing for
further asset deflation and concentrating on capital preservation are the core
priorities. But with every announcement of a further government bail-out to be
paid for by future tax-payers, sceptics might rightly wonder whether a crisis
brought about by easy credit is going to be resolved by more of the same. Never
was true portfolio insurance more passionately and urgently sought, nor more
difficult to come by.