“Such supplementary interventions [by the State], which are
justified by urgent reasons touching the common good, must be as brief as
possible, so as to avoid removing permanently from society and business systems
the functions which are properly theirs, and so as to avoid enlarging
excessively the sphere of State intervention to the detriment of both economic
and civil freedom.” – Walter Bagehot
As the quote above mentions very clearly the State
intervention is required but it is required for short bursts. Thinking back to the beginning of the Great
Recession, Federal Reserve intervention was needed to prevent a complete
collapse of the financial system. The Federal
Reserve acted quickly and effectively and staved off the crisis. Since that time they have remained involved
in the economic “recovery” and it is their belief that unless they remain fully
invested that the economy will crater.
The question is have they crossed the line? The line I refer to is the line between
required involvement to rescue the economy for common good or permanently
removing systems and functions that are properly seated in the private
sector. This is critical to the long
term viability of the general economy and is the reason that I continue to
remain skeptical of the current market movements.
The question therefore is whether continued activity will
continue to stimulate or whether it is just kicking a tin can up a very steep
hill. Take Greece for example. They need to borrow money to stave off a
default but no-one will lend them any money other than the ECB who ultimately
underwrites the debt that Greece owes.
So effectively the ECB who is owed the money is lending more so that the
insolvent country can continue to service their debt. This is unsustainable in the long run unless
there is a structural change to either the debt or the Greek government or
both.
Looking at the Federal Reserve, saving the financial system
was definitely a necessity. Continuing
to pour money into poor investments is not.
The second use of funds was done under the guise of stimulating the
economy. Bernanke who schooled himself
on the Great Depression feels that the cause of the Great Depression was in
large part due to the Federal Reserve cutting off funding too early. He is determined not to repeat past mistakes
and so has kept the foot hard on the gas-peddle for an extended period. The result is a now mountain of debt and
little in the way of success. More
importantly is that the economy now seems wedded to more money printing to
survive and the ills of the past have not been corrected but have been glossed
over with more money.
In my view the later portions of the so called quantitative
easing have wasted an opportunity. That
opportunity was at their doorstep in the time of severe crisis but was
squandered and now we have created a level of debt that has become a burden to
the economy and is stripping away market opportunities that should be filled by
the private sector.
Furthermore the market is very fickle and at some point the
low level of interest rates could spiral as it has done in Europe. If this happens our current trillion dollar
budget deficits will look small and trying to borrow your way out of that hole
will not happen. As I have argued
before I believe that interest rates will remain low for longer than anyone
expects but it certainly appears that we are squandering an opportunity to
structurally fix the problem while these interest rates remain low by thinking
that the only solution to the problem is to print money. This is not the solution but is going to
cause great problems in the future.
However in the meantime Wall Street celebrates any time they hear of
more quantitative easing and this is a worry in and of itself as the Federal
Reserve pats itself on the back each time the market goes up.
Their thought is that if the rich get richer (through asset
appreciation) that the income will trickle down to those that do not have a job
(through job creation from the rich) but this is not happening as unemployment
remains stubbornly high. In fact while
there is a strong correlation between the stock market and job growth I would
argue that job growth creates a strong market and not the other way around,
however our leaders in their infinite wisdom believe otherwise. Hold onto your hats as this will be a bumpy
ride.
No comments:
Post a Comment