I’m going to geek it up today and talk about a couple ways that economies grow – import replacement and new work. Both are very applicable to the current US and world economy, but we’re going to start examining them by looking at a new and simple economy.
Let’s take a new village created around a gold mine. It earns its money by digging up ore and shipping it out. Everything in the economy is imported in – the booze, the mining equipment, the food, equipment is sent to be repaired, clean water is trucked in – heck in some cases even the laundry is shipped out. If we assume the economy is earning 100 million a year, probably 90 million of that is flowing right out.
The something interesting starts happening. The bathtub rum guys get good enough to set up their own microbrewery. Someone starts farming nearby. Others start repairing the complex machinery in in town. The village drills down to an aquifer and starts piping that out to residents. All of this is import replacement – things which used to be imported from outside the economy are now being created
So, instead of 90% of the economy’s money flowing straight out, maybe it’s down to 70%. And that additional money that stays in the economy can be used to buy more outside goods, or can be saved to start up new businesses. Probably it’s used for both. So maybe they start importing fancier stuff – dvd players, better filtration equipment for their water, and so on. Maybe they hire some engineers to come in and build infrastructure – a sewage treatment plant, a better road system, a deepening of the local harbor and so on.
Imagine that the mining community has its own currency and think about what’s been happening with their currency during this. When they started import replacing, they used less of their money to buy outside goods. Since that was the case, their currency became worth more. As it became worth more it became possible for them to import more goods – for less, but as they did, the currency then dropped in value, making it more expensive to buy outside goods – and making any goods they might sell to the outside world worth more.
And that’s when a couple other interesting things happened. The microbrewery, having had to brew using substandard conditions and local flora turned out to have a product unlike anything anyone else had, and there was enough money saved up to build it up so it could produce more booze. The community started selling the booze to the world, and instead of just having money coming in from the mine, it now had money coming in from liquor sales. And some of the mining engineers figured out a better way to extract ore. They left the mining company (their state being smart enough not to allow non-compete clauses in contracts), started up their own business, and started manufacturing the necessary machines for their new mining technique. They then sold that equipment and the expertise for using it (but not for manufacturing it) to the outside world. Even more money started coming into the community.
And the local currency, with more money coming in, appreciated. The community then did another round of buying new, more upscale imports – an upscale auto dealership opened up in town, more fancy electronics goods came into town and so on. In reaction to that, the currency dropped in value, and some local businesses started up to provide some of the more fancy goods – some technicians from mining company, who work on microelectronics, split off to set up a company creating consumer electronics goods whose selling point is hardiness. Lots of small companies making parts for both the mining company and the electronics company spring up, so they no longer have to buy those parts from outside, and indeed they start exporting those parts beyond what is now, not a village, but a city.
And our new city has grown in three ways. First there was the original resource – the reason for existing. In this case that was a mine, but it could have been as an entrepot town (say having a harbor, or being at an intersection of shipping lines, whether rail, road or river) ; it could have been a fishing town; it could even have been the center of an agricultural district. From there it first used import replacement to reduce the amount of money it was spending on outside goods. Next it created new work, a new product or industry – in this case a new type of booze, and a new way of mining plus the equipment that went with it and exported those things to the world. Part of what made that possible was the money saved in the community by increasing the savings rate through the earlier import replacement – keeping more money in the community. Then it increased imports which is actually part of the cycle of growth, because it allows the community to learn about new goods to either import replace them, or to create new work. Both of which happened with the creation of the electronics company (new work, plus import replacement) and the myriad of small suppliers (import replacement, plus new exports). Through all of this, in our simplified model, currency was applying feedback – telling the community when it could afford to import more stuff, giving it an export subsidy when it had imported more, and an import subsidy when it had created new wealth. (In the real world as it currently stands, where major countries manipulate their currency with massive interventions, exchange rates don’t give accurate feedback, though they still give subsidies for one activity or another – the Chinese Yuan, for example, is set at a concessionary rate to act as an export subsidy and to encourage the Chinese economy to do income substitution. The US dollar currently does the reverse with respect to most Asian economies.)
Now that we’ve seen how an economy grows, let’s see how it can shrink. Our city, let’s call it Aurelia, has had nothing but growth. But two things have happened – the cost of being in it have gone up (higher living expenses, higher taxes, higher property values) and the company creating the mining equipment has figured out how to turn it into the turnkey operation that can be done entirely in-house. The technology is now mature, it no longer needs to be located next to the miners and engineers who are working the field, figuring out new tweaks, and so on. As such, it no longer makes sense to keep it in a place that costs a lot – it’s not necessary, and all it does is increase costs. So they close down their manufacturing operations (but probably leave their headquarters in Aurelia) and set it up in a place with a cheaper currency, in the countryside where expenses are lower (but still near some rail or sea lines for transport). The economy of Aurelia contracts – less money is coming in, and indeed, now the local mine has to buy the mine equipment it needs from outsiders. The currency also takes a dip in value.
That dip in value is a feedback mechanism. It makes it easier to do import replacement (because imported goods are now costing more) and it makes it easier to create new work and export it to the rest of the world. In a properly functioning economy, that’s what happens – someone starts manufacturing goods that were imported, or creates new work, the currency value goes back up, and the economy hums along in alternating cycles of creating new work/import replacing, sending mature industries out to cheaper domiciles, and importing new goods which are hopefully fueled for possible future import replacement periods or which help new work be created.
Now this is a theoretical model. That’s not to say this isn’t how the world works – it does, sort of, and there are many examples (Silicon Valley, Manchester, Massachusetts at various time, Chicago and New York manufacturing, Detroit, etc…), but there are also many cases where it fails, and a city, or country, loses the ability to continue the virtuous cycles.
And this model is a useful one for looking at the economy in the world today. Let’s take a very brief look at this, starting with China. What China is doing today is keeping their currency artificially cheap (they spend about 10% of GDP on currency intervention, which is a massive number). Cheap currency means imported goods are more expensive, which means it encourages import replacement in a big way. Cars, consumer electronics, ripped movies, etc… it makes sense to make them in China not just because China has cheap labor, taxes, etc… but because China has cheap currency. So China gets huge amounts of growth both in import replacement (for internal consumption) and in export led growth. And when a mature industry, in, say, America – like most manufacturing industries, looks at where they should move their plants, China has a significant advantage in getting them, which is why China is a main offshoring destination.
The US, in the meantime, has an overvalued dollar against China (and the other major Asian currencies). That means instead of getting feedback that says “it’s time to import replace or to create new work”, the feedback that the US is getting says “you should be importing goods and shipping out mature industries.” That, of course, is what is happening. And since it’s happening in huge amounts, the US savings rate is actually negative, meaning that to do new work, to import replace, American has to actually borrow money from overseas.
Now currency feedback isn’t the only thing that matters – sometimes it will still make sense to import replace. Sometimes someone will still come up with an idea for new work, for a new product, that is worth doing and which because of supplier networks and other issues (often just “I don’t want to set up my business in a foreign place like China) is worth setting up in the US.
But in general the current atmosphere is not conducive to a huge wave of either import replacement or new work (the last great wave was the Internet boom in the 90’s). This should have been the decade that telecom really took off, but because conditions are extremely poor and because of regulatory and oligopoly issues (you can’t really innovate, because the majors simply won’t let you activate most features on their networks) it didn’t happen. Without that huge boost of new work, or of import replacement (the next big bout of which will probably actually be energy replacement) the US economy has essentially stagnated, with awful unemployment numbers, awful raises, and huge amounts of debt being taken on.
There are more lessons to be taken from this model, as well. Non-compete clauses, for example, are awful for economic growth (it’s not an accident that Silicon Valley is in California, with its restrictions on non-competes). Mature industries always head out for cheaper domiciles, it’s just a question of how far communications and transportation infrastructure – and political stability, allow them to do so. Small companies are where most new products come from. Concentrations of many small firms tend to give rise to more types of new work – to new products and industries, more than large monopolies or oligopolies (there are some exceptions).
And an economy which isn’t creating new work, new products, as fast as it is rationalizing old work, has a problem. As an industry matures what took many highly skilled people to do, takes fewer and fewer over time and it becomes, packageable, routinized – and thus able to be shipped away from the area that created it – able to be done by second raters who aren’t at the cutting edge.
And this, to a large extent, is the situation the US finds itself in.
EndNote
Those who are interested in this topic may wish to read Jane Jacobs’ The Economy of Cities and Cities and the Wealth of Nations which is where the general cycle is cribbed from.
Ian writes also for The Agonist
Related posts:
- Buy Bonds! Chinese Rock Meets Economic Hard Place
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Richard McCormack, Editor of Manufacturing a Better Future for America
- Superfusion: How China and America Became One Economy
- Recovery? Romer Contrasts GDP Growth with Job Loss
- Benchmarked Crudely: Oil Soon to be Priced in Non-Dollars





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

zed?
I need to head out, then I will come back and read. Have fun.
Zed out?
great pic; now to read.
Truthout – recommended reading: Very Scary Things
One thing that can’t be “shipped away” is our contribution to global warming. Many argue this would be the cutting edge for creating new jobs in this country. Jobs that in the main could not be outsourced.
Ross Perot was right – about a lot of things that have since happened. It is the giant sucking sound…
http://www.debates.org/pages/trans92c.html
Would the U.S. economy be better off today without NAFTA and CAFTA?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 8
CAFTA is a piece of junk. NAFTA… depends. The US makes money from NAFTA, but one can argue that the structural effects on the economy have been negative. The people who really lost from NAFTA were the Mexicans. It’s also a huge infringement on sovereignty, which is the main knock against it.
The WTO deals are more of a concern than NAFTA, honestly.
Straw poll results now due to be announced- did the mad mitter keel over his gooper opponents as expected? We’ll soon find out.
Don’t forget, tonight, tomorrow, the peak for the Perseid meteor shower. Best seen shortly before daybreak:
http://www.space.com/scienceas…..20806.html
Sure is quiet out there tonight, or should I say, in here.
?Does anyone know eef T-Rex ees around?
eh?
Thom Hartman advocates returning to a tariff based system to level the playing field. What’d ya think Ian?
good post by the way
Off topic, but this is a nice write-up about the HRC/LOGO Visible Vote forum.
rwcole @ 10
Fifteen minute delay just announced from the stage in Ames.
Fascinating post Ian … good and meaty!
And more info on economics is a plus – we tend to be pretty uninformed on econs
Excellent article, Ian. This helps me understand US economic issues much better. Now, what to do? Certainly we need to invent new jobs in new industries — why not climate change? Green technology and retro-fitting would create many US jobs, right?
LS @ 7
Ross Perot, in my opinion, would have been a great president. He loves the United States. He is honest. He knows (knew?) more about business and economics than almost anyone. He has (had?) a great, pugnacious personality. Perfect? No. Better than [fill in the blank]? Yes. I voted for him twice and said fuck the MSM.
Jonathan @ 19
He’s still around, as far as I can tell.
Sonoma Rus @ 14
If you do, China may well retaliate with their reserves. It’s hard to play tough when you’re so massively in debt, deficit and trade deficit.
That said, I fully expect some significant protectionism. The era of globalization is winding down, for all you don’t hear people saying so. And tariffs aren’t always a bad thing, especially since many countries are effectively employing trade subsidies (mind you, so does the US, especially in agricultural goods).
I support free trade (but not free capital flows), but we don’t have free trade right now, we have very managed trade that calls itself free.
Only 14,000 votes cast in Ames; the state GOP was projecting 30,000.
TeddySanFran @ 18
Bill Clinton has advocated this, but I haven’t heard Hill talk about it at all. Bush certainly doesn’t want to solve the Saudi problem.
LS @ 11
There is also this from Sky & Telescope: Prepare for the Perseids
Very interesting, Ian. Looks like we’re in a world of hurt. What do you see as the most immediate changes we need to make?
The Saudis aren’t a problem for Bush.
TeddySanFran @ 18
I agree there’s a lot of potential within those markets, it behooves us not to cede that to the Japanese or Europeans!
Only 14,000 voted and 53% of them puked as they pulled the lever.
NAFTA was supposed to be a big boon for small farmers, workers and entrepreneurs in Mexico, but evidence is that NAFTA seriously harmed these groups. This is in part because the biggest most powerful aspect of NAFTA, CAFTA and WTO etc is not free trade at all, but rather free investment insurance for international projects, and overly prod intellectual property rights guarantees to those who are already very well off. For example, Mexican small farmers got wiped out. This produced a free and desperate labor pool to fuel renewed illegal immigration problems in the US.
One issue raised in this nice post, though almost as a side issue, is the harm rent seeking can do to economic growth and progress, and technological innovation. The idea of rent seeking has traditionally been associated with government regulation and how interest groups (corporations, labor unions, industries, special interest groups) can influence government action to divert revenue streams to those groups. The idea is that you can institute a government regulation that implicitly establishes a property right over some stream of revenue, which you promptly grab and stuff in your pockets. Whether that revenue can be attributed to any productive activity on your part is irrelevant. I think that recently corporate rent seeking has become as big an issue as government rent seeking. Ian Welsh mentions overly aggressive non-compete clauses and oligopoly as mechanisms that can facilitate rent seeking. I think that overly aggressive investment insurance regimes, and intellectual property rights guarantees are the most important parts of these co-called trade agreements, and they facilitate private rent seeking.
Effectively, NAFTA subsidized large-scale international investment in agriculture and manufacturing in Mexico. Little folks got creamed. Their choice has been to compete for a limited number of jobs in border manufacturing plants or heading north.
To the extent that NAFTA served not to facilitate free trade, but provide cheap investment insurance and opportunities for private rent seeking in Mexico and Central America, they have harmed the economic well-being of small business and workers and farmers in those areas at the expense of international corporations, or large Mexican companies. To the extent that this means more unhappy poor people next to us, I think it has harmed the US.
But I think the big tie in to this wonderful economics post (which the world needs more of -thank you FDL!) is that NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO initiatives have harmed opportunity for local economic development by the small fry. And not for any reason connected to real economic fundamentals, but rather crony capitalism (free and overly generous investment insurance that creates both an unfair advantage, and moral hazard by the big shots taking too much risk and then sluffing off the resulting social costs) and provides more opportunities for private corporate rent seeking.
If NAFTA had been truly and only and specifically a free trade agreement, I think the results would have been much different, and it would have been a good thing. The real NAFTA, well, the results have been very mixed.
TeddySanFran @ 26
Actually, they are family.
TeddySanFran @ 22
Heh, that ought to rattle their cage a little more!
TeddySanFran @ 18
I would try and turn energy from something that is primarily dug up and is bottlenecked into something that is a capital good (that you can manufacture more of, like solar power). I would do a massive refit of all buildings to passive and active solar with meters to allow for selling energy back into the net (you can’t offshore or outsource most of those jobs). I would break up the telecom monopoly to allow the telecom revolution to actually happen, and mandate open access like in the 90’s on phone lines which allowed ISPs to sprout all over the place. I would outlaw all non-competes in the US.
And I would allow the US dollar to fall to its natural value, indeed I would force it to do so, which takes away China and Japan’s blackmail value. Mind you, that’d be a huge standard of living hit, but it’s going to happen anyway (you do this as fast as possible, so you have 4 years to recover for the next election.)
TeddySanFran @ 22
“None of the above” might be the winner?
wesgpc @ 29
Rent seeking – rentiers – deserve a whole post of their own. Rent seeking behaviour is perhaps the biggest problem in the US today, I absolutely agree.
As a Canadian, I have argued on Canadian blogs that we should unilaterally end NAFTA (6 months notice is all it takes). There’s an argument that it’s been a slight net benefit to us, but the cost in sovereignty and tied hands is too much, in my opinion and I think Canada should be diversifying its export market away from the US as much as possible, in any case.
NEED RESOURCES HELP.
Sorry to intrude off-topic.
I recall reading somewhere the amazing factoid that Iran is a NET CONSUMER of oil (or energy?). Can anybody help me get a source on that? It would be much appreciated.
.
CTuttle @ 31
Tickets to cast “votes” each cost $35, so it’s the difference between over a million dollars and less than half a million for the Iowa GOP.
heh.
May they go the way of the Maryland GOP.
Ian Welsh @ 32
Once our third rate service economy is done we are toast. China and Japan own our debt-we don’t actually make anything. What is actually left of our economy? Now that Bush has trashed our image abroad other countries are losing confidence in our long term strength and sustainability. The checks that W is trying to cash will ultimately come back “NSF”.
Dumbo @ 35
Don’t have a source, but I think what you’re talking about is gasoline, not oil. They don’t have the refinery capacity to meet their own needs, and have to re-import. Could be wrong on this, mind, but that’s my recollection.
wesgpc @ 29
Please post more. Please. I’m a (dumb) tax lawyer with an undergrad degree in electrical engineering. I don’t know economics. I want to learn.
The thing that’s worrisome is how does the fact we are spending about $12,000,000,000 per month on two ‘wars’ (with no tax increase to cover these wars) factor into all this?
Ian, googling “Iran gasoline ‘net consumer’” isn’t finding it. Neither does “Iran oil ‘net consumer’”.
I think you might be right about the gasoline/refinery thing. I need a quotable source, though.
TeddySanFran @ 36
Coupled with the lackluster crop of candidates, the GOP must be reeling!!! Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch…!!! ;-)
TeddySanFran @ 22
What does this mean, TSF?
This also begs the question of selling oil in euros instead of dollars. Anyone beilieve we went to war for WMD’s? Democatracy? or Freedom? Hell no. Its to keep the dollar as the basis for international oil sales. Try explaining that to JQ Public though
Another delay just announced. I wonder if Ron Paul won and they can’t figure out what to do?
Goopers broke? Did they try advertising that you get a signed photo of the President if you donate? Oh they did? That’s when the money dried up? OK Never mind.
Let’ hear it for Paul—sane hope for the gooper party!!
Loo Hoo. @ 43
It means the Iowa GOP didn’t sell as many tickets as they’d hoped. You gotta buy a $35 ticket (or have someone buy you one) to vote in the Iowa Straw Poll today.
In 1999, GWB’s campaign bought 11,000 tickets for people, and only got 7,400 votes for their candidate. Slippery Iowans.
Tiger widens his lead in the PGA going into his final day. Nicklaus wishes him the best and goes off to puke.
Goopers forced to delay the announcement as they weren’t geared up to count so few votes.
Apparently the Diebold machines used to count the votes malfuntioned, according to the Atlantic reporter Marc Ambinder.
I am not making this up.
There was a court case yesterday in Iowa, dismissed by a judge, asking for paper ballots to be hand-counted.
rwcole @ 47
It would seriously put the fear of god in them…!!! 8-)
rwcole @ 47
I THINK I might be able to vote for Paul. He’s a rad. Not perfect. But no one is.
Dumbo @ 41
I don’t have that, but an Iranian friend told me today that gasoline is strictly rationed there.
I kinda like Paul- actually I kinda like libertarians in general. I’m not keen on the government and it’s armies of christian soldiers tellin me what I can and cannot do—libertarians are the anti-fascist party.
TeddySanFran @ 51
Diebold machines acting up on the goopers? Maybe there is divine retribution after all!!!
rwcole @ 55
So are Liberaltarians!!! ;-)
rwcole @ 55
don’t be so sure. Paul, like his dem counterpart Kucinich, doesn’t want women to have abortions.
The trouble with tryin to control the vote with hackable chines- is —that there are plenty of hackers on both sides.
mom
Well I don’t agree with that part- that was just a little libertarian war dance.
TeddySanFran @ 51
HA! Maybe all of the states will go the way of California before ‘08.
Ian: if you can or want to come up with a post on recent developments in public and private rent-seeking in US, or the Americas, with some specific examples, I will read it. Heck, I’ll print it out and frame the thing and hang it in my office. It would be greatly appreciated.
I think the only promising current development in the contemporary economic policy stream (which is very hostile to the non-rich) that encourages the sort of local small scale innovation discussed in this post is microfinance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microfinance
It is not a magic bullet by any means. However, it has shown benefits for very poor areas that were considered intractable basket cases. The whole idea was considered mad, of course, by most main-stream development economists.
Of course, if its success continues, I am sure that insurance companies and some governments, will find opportunities to co-opt it. I think a corporate or a Cheney/Bush run micro-finance program would turn into a pay-day loan scam pretty quickly. You could look at the current mortgage market mess as a very poorly regulated for-profit micro-finance scheme for middle and working class US.
Some people maintain that the rapid decrease in poverty levels in the 90s were a result of Rubin’s demand for strict adherence to federal guidelines for non-discrimination and active marketing of bank loans to poor inner-city neighborhoods. That was a kind of microfinance program.
I think the using a mining town as the main example in this post was a good one. If a local extractive industry is locally owned, then one major block to local economic innovation and development (liquidity constraints) is effectively removed. The same would be true for a high value agriculture cash crop. Of course, institutional factors play a big role here, since also need to avoid severe concentration of land, income and wealth.
Maybe Diebold will go broke—I love the smell of justice in the morning.
rwcole @ 55
I’ve been hesitant to say here that I lean by force of nature toward libertarian principles.
Truth is, I would have liked to live in the U.S. when the federal government had a non-existent footprint on the land, and people were left to form their communities.
Jonathan
I’m kinda a “Leave me the fuck alone” sorta guy too.
Wasn’t there a Nobel prize awarded for micro-finance recently? And why wouldn’t those successes be replicable in our own depressed areas? Why can’t microloans be used to rescue NOLA, for example?
You’ve got the libertarian wing- the christian right wing- and the unbelievably rich fuck wings of the gooper party.
The musical question is “Can a party fly with three wings?”
TeddySanFran @ 48
I would say that it means lots of dejected GOoPers.
Now they gotta fix the vote so that Ron Paul and Barack Obama don’t come in 1st and 2nd.
They are a scurriying.
-GSD
I think that Mickey Mouse came in first and that’s what’s causin the heartburn.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/se…..2heart.htm
As Ian indicated, the problem for Iran is its very heavily subsidized (and hence cheap) gasoline. It is an oil exporter.
wesgpc @ 62
They’re trying to co-opt micro-finance – huge amounts of interest in it. But they can’t (yet) figure out how to get their costs down enough to make it profitable without having usurious rates of interest (in fact, they want to convince India, for example, to raise the allowable interest rate to over 40% annually.)
What I fear is that microfinance, which is now used primarily to help bootstrap people (they invest in small businesses mostly) will be used as the 3rd world equivalent of payday loan companies, which will make things much worse rather than better.
Cheap consumer credit is ok. Expensive consumer credit, imo, is worse than none at all. And ideally, microlending and credit circles should be used primarily for business, not for consumer spending.
Interesting thread, but the answers we all look for have been in front of us for many years and only one person in the US government ever had the gumption ( balls ) to bring it to the public. That person is Ron Paul.
The creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 without question had to be the largest wholesale sellout of the the American people. Article one of the Constitution does not call for a central bank owned by a private banking cartel, but rather a US Treasury that would regulate money in only gold and silver. Not a fiat currencey backed by nothing more than hot air.
On Friday, Bernanke set in motion a financial time bomb. Our government and the markets are like addicts requiring greater and greater interventional fixes in the form of printing more and more worthless fiat, because there is nothing to back it as Nixon broke the bond between the dollar and gold in 1971.
Adding 35 billion in easy credit will do nothing other than monetizing greater an greater debt. In actuality, this was a bail out for banks that are stuck holding mortages on homes whose owners shouldn’t have been in homes in the first place because they were placed into them by corrupt lending standards such as no doc loans as well as no credit worthiness checks.
Finally, the Chinese have said enough is enough. We will no longer buy your worthless debt in the form of your T bills as you continue to back your economy with worthless dollars when the rest of the world knows that the only real money that mankind has ever known is both gold and silver.
A few more weeks of this nonsense and the Federal Reserve will implode on itself. Then and only then will we return back to what the founding fathers had called for. A US Treasury. Just Google ” Fiat Empire” and watch how the Fed was created and for what reasons. Then once you put 2 2 together you’ll better understand why your elected Congressmen and Senators keep getting voted back in to bring home the bacon. But that bacon is bankrupting us all. This ponzi scam is going to end very badly, and it isn’t going to take years to happen, but rather weeks. That, you can take to the bank.
Iraq has the same two bit a gallon gasoline as Iran- when ya can get any.
NH has been very conservative in the past, but the libertarian wing has been the strongest. Old Yankee money second, lunatic fringer Jesus Campers round out the rear very weakly.
-GSD
“What’ll ya sell me some gas for- the guy down the street’s only chargin two bits- but he’s out?”
“Three bucks- I charge two bits when I’M out too”.
Actually, old Yankees used to be in first place. Now they are second.
-GSD
Wonder what Karl Rove is doing right now…
TeddySanFran @ 66
There was a Nobel awarded, aye. Lending circles probably would work in depressed parts of America, but you do need to include the whole package – not just microlending, but the circles as well. It’s only a partial solution (infastructure needs still have to be dealt with by the government, and New Orleans needs significant infrastructure development) but it is a good part of a solution.
You do need a low cost structure to make micro-lending work, as well, and the major banks aren’t really set up to do that, nor have they figured out how yet.
re Paul and libertarianism: I actually posed the question a while back to a libertarian about how that could be reconciled with his anti-abortion position, and they explained that their philosophy precludes government involvement only against “victimless” crimes; thus, to the “life at conception” subset of the libertarian community, abortion is NOT a victimless crime, and therefore it can be outlawed just like any other “murder.”
A little on the slick side for my tastes……but it is, I suppose, sustainable as a matter of logic.
Anyway, b4 any of the sane folks here go cheerleading for Paul….dig a little deeper. Too tired to look for a link right now….but I have researched it……..and he ain’t quite as cool as he seems.
oddmommy @ 58
oddmommy, That is a very misleading statement re Kucinich and how he would govern, imo.
Karl’s tryin ta figure out what the hell he’s gonna do after his Frankenstein monster goes down the tubes and back ta Crawford for good.
“Broken down failure of a political director who destroyed national party looking for work”.
I gotta run, but I think the left blogosphere should work very hard to get cheap computers to lots of poor communities.
I think it would make an incredible outreach program.
-GSD
It will be interesting to see what happens if (when) the US dollar loses it world domination as the main reserve currency. I don’t think at all that is tied to what currency is used to pay for oil, and I think it will take decades. But even a slow gradual movement will have an impact. Then some of the costs of the lack of the kind of development Ian talks about in this post will appear. I think it will appear both in the US and China (since what are they going to do with all that WalMart crap they make if they can’t sell it to the US?)
The main brake to US dollar losing status as world reserve currency is that it has been the world reserve currency for decades. China would probably like to see dollar lose its prominence, but at a very nice slow predictable pace over 20 years, since they will be just as much toast as the US does if it happens quickly.
By the way, saw figures today that US has dropped further in ranking of life expectancy compared to other countries (and not just developed ones).
GSD @ 68
I think it means: why would you spend $35 to vote for an extension of a failed presidency?
I always thought Iowans were smart.
To some extent the part about cities is already happening. Compare Seattle with other cities. It brings in tons of really bright, creative young people from all over. These kids just up and leave smaller towns to be around other smart, creative kids. The smart old folks stay, because it’s so much fun to be around the bright young people. The schools improve, the neighborhoods thrive, and the city grows and prospers. Culture is strong, because of the large number of creative people attracted to the bright lights.
On the other hand, take Kansas. About half of the people there don’t even want their kids to learn about evolution. What smart person wants to raise their kids there? What smart kid wants to stay there? What kind of high-tech work is there to attract smart creative people?
The change is underway. The cities will survive, and the rest of the country will stagnate. The only real question is whether the cities can suck up the money that the rich have stolen during this administration.
This stock market business is killing credit users. Home equity, etc. is tapped out and these people are transfering debt to their plastic. Where’s it all going to end?
massacio
Kansas is pretty interesting. As I recall, their educational level is pretty high. It’s a minority who have infested their political system with Jesus freaks…Don’t know what it will take to kick em out. Used ta be one of the most progressive states in the nation.
wesgpc @ 83
I actually think it’ll happen fairly soon. A decade probably, though a smart President in 08 could reverse it.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 85
it will end soon when the private banks that nake up the Federal reserve go bust!
KO at 86
Didn’t follow that one- could you explain?
I trust the people.
Not each and every one. But I’ll always subcribe to the notion of a jury of my peers.
The people get it right, given an honest majority vote. They cannot be corrupted.
Elected representatives are corruptible.
TeddySanFran @ 66
Yes, there was a group akin to doctors without borders, that won a Nobel recently, I can’t recall their name! A similar response in NOLA would never occur under the current regime, too many Have-Mores would not allow their Government teat to be dried up!!!
See, now here’s the kind of creative business idea that Ian’s imaginary city is going to have. Only in Dubai.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20217248/
Eureka Springs @ 79
ok, ok, I’ve heard that before. Not gonna argue about it. I’m prepared to give him the benefit of that doubt. I certainly agree that his position on other matters is solidly progressive.
Doesn’t really matter what Kucinich and Paul’s positions are- my dog has a better chance of being prez than either.
Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic
There has been a lot of wonky work on the actuarial aspects of micro finance in health and disaster insurance lately. The World Health Organization and some actuarial and insurance math types are pushing development. I don’t see that being co-opted by rich corporations much, since quick money simply cannot be found in those kinds of insurance markets in low income populations.
But I agree with Ian, look at pay-day loans in the US, micro finance could turn into that if ‘innovative public private partnerships’ are not very carefully scrutinized before implmentation. Any kind of scheme can be twisted and co-opted.
Back to NAFTA, I really wold support something like NAFTA or CAFTA if it limited itself to free trade. I think that would help lower income countries and their populations tremendously -especially agricultural speciality and commodity crops in low income contries. But the free trade provisions are overwhelmed by the crony big capitalist and big finance-government complex provisions, and for the average person, and economic development that helps the average people, the results are very mixed.
I knew there was a reason I like working for a relatively small and agile company.
And also why it seems that I can do stuff with our manufacturers’ products that even they can’t do.
I like the idea about cheap computers for everyone…by pass MSM.
Loo Hoo. @ 92
And it’s 1, 2, 3 what are we fightin’ for, don’t ask me I don’t give a damn…next stop…
Ian Welsh @ 87
You guys are talking about the decline and fall of the U.S. IMO, the U.S. ceased to be what it was once it ceased to be a country generating ideas and became a country simply asserting its power — sometime around 1980.
Any particular reason my comments aren’t posted?
If the Democrats get back in the WH, the war and the economy will be dumped right into their lap. And the whole mess will become my party’s fault. The people won’t care a twit it was all the fault of George Bush.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 100
You are correct, I believe.
Jonathan @ 100
Some reason to believe that.
As FDL will be talking about tomorrow, the mid to late 70’s are also when the US’s economy stopped working for everyone, and started working, really, only for the affluent – a trend which has kept accelerating. A country that guts its middle and working classes is always on the way down.
rwcole @ 87
I use Kansas on purpose, my brother teaches biology in Colorado, and he thinks it is pretty funny about the evolution thing. He says Coloradans love it, it reduces the competition their kids face. Boulder, of course, is another example of a successful city.
Rovian talking points…Obama’s too black, Hillary has boobs, Kucinich is too short, Kerry is a flip flopper, Biden said something, Gravel’s too loud,…ah…but Little Red Riding Hood might just run into one of those Repubs…
My…what BIG eyes you have…
My…what a BIG nose you have…
My…what BIG teeth you have…
All the better to eat you all up!!!
Jonathan @ 102
Seconded.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 100
Congrats on being #100, but I disagree. People know that this is Bush’s war. Ain’t no amount of spin that can turn it into the next president’s.
Gov Mitt Romney won the 2007 Ames straw poll, receiving 4516 votes, or 31%.
In a surprise, Gov. Mike Huckabee finished second with 2587 votes at 18.1%
Be careful about the libertarian love … the L party (as opposed to the philosophy) tend towards very conservative attitudes and their attempt to take over NH was dreadful … real threat to basic services and super arrogant
Oklahoma kiddo @ 101
Carter syndrome.
Loo Hoo. @ 109
I do believe a lot of folks in my party voted to go along with Bush and attack Iraq. No? ;0)
Oklahoma kiddo @ 101
If they do not take action quickly after assuming the WH on either of those issues then they will inherit the blame, however, if action is done quickly it would deflect the blame!!!
Tancredo #4??? Heaven help us.
Younis and the microfinance movement are quite interesting – and some corporates are working with microfinance in good and creative ways. Like Cemex in Mexico creating a microfinance program that enables extremely poor families to build and own their own homes using microfinance and a very sophisticated building program.
Eureka Springs @ 112
that’s right. The sheeple have short memories, and are easily swayed.
Thanks for that post on US Dollar-Yuan, Ian.
But to others, I do not think which national currency is used to pay for oil, or which currency is world reserve currency means squat for the US in the long run (as long as we do not have really stupid leaders -which I admit is a big if these days, and considering the boobs the GOP allows to run for President, every election will be choice between a Dem and a true empty suit). The pound is no longer a reserve currency, and UK is still a major financial center, and country is doing well.
Besides Jane Jacobs, some of the issues discussed in this post are also discussed by the ecoomist Samuel Bowles, who is also a good writer and can turn this stuff into mathy econospeak, which comes in handy sometimes.
Two books below discuss the formal economics of this post. The first book below is very wonky and unless you like math, you will have skip big chunks. But you can understand the book without following anything except the simplest math parts. The second book is an intro text .
Microeconomics: Behavior, Institutions, and Evolution, Princeton University Press 2006
Understanding Capitalism: Competition, Command, and Change, Oxford University Press, USA; 3 edition, 2005
Samuel Bowles
How predictive is this straw pole? McCain and Ghouliani are deep within the outhouse if it is indicative.
Stick a fork in St. McCain! Paul over the Thompson twins and Ghouliani??? Yee-haw!!!
Am I the only one whose computer is experiencing hallucinations today????
Loo Hoo: thanks. Now I have a reason to visit Dubai. It will be far down on my list, and prolly won’t make it before I die, but it would be interesting walking from 120 degree heat into a place made of ice.
LS, it ain’t your computer. If we can’t trust Teddy, it’s time to wrap it up!
TeddySanFran @ 110
Considering the amount of time I spend reading news and politics this is an awkward question, but, who is John Cox? (besides John McCains saving grace *s*)
CTuttle @ 120
Speak the truth as you see it. Get results.
wesgpc @ 118
I think it does matter, myself, but it’s too long a subject to get into here and do justice to. The late Oldman calculated the effect, at, iirc, about .5% GDP growth a year. Which seems small, but is actually huge over time. England really went through some tough times in the middle of the century during the loss of the pound hegemony and after (aye, there were plenty of other things going on, so sorting it out can be difficult). I know people who lived there during the period, and it was very unpleasant – certainly the City survived and even eventually prospered, but for non-financial industry types it was a bad time.
Thanks for the references, I should look them up myself.
Loo Hoo. @ 123
Today, I have experienced slow comments, invisible comments, now the post upstairs is back in error mode or something…sigh…the invisible comments were really cool though!!
LS @ 127
The post went up early, I believe. It’s been pulled, but will be back later.
Ian Welsh @ 128
Thanks Ian, I figured that is what happened. :>
Ian: well OK, you have a point. For what I say to be true, I should have said “doesn’t mean squat IN THE LONG RUN.” No question, that if it happens fast (and the ten years you mention would be fast enough to have noticeable effects), it will be very interesting for us in the US, very interesting indeed.
LS @ 129
Whose was it? TRex?
CTuttle @ 131
Thers.
Mike Huckabee performed with his band Capitol Offense and two special guests today, Duncan Hunters wife and an Elvis impersonator.
Did Elvis save Mike Huckabee…
The polls say that Rudy G. is the front runner?
Ian, so how do you think this economy is going to shake out..really?
Personally, I think they will just keep “printing worthless paper money”…at least for awhile to stabilize things. It really is a house made of paper…the problem is the value of that paper. Something’s gotta give ultimately, but maybe I’m wrong. The “rich” will make out okay, the middle rich are gonna take a bad hit and end up back with everybody else. That will be a rude awakening…McMansions and all…
LS @ 127
Heck yeah, you could have been saving all of the world in those invisible comments, and who’s to prove you wrong?!
Rudy and McCain chose not to participate in the straw poll … which led Iowans to be rather pissed at them …
Oklahoma kiddo @ 134
Whaaaaaaaat? I thought it was Romney. Ghouliani scares me a whole lot more than Romney.
All I can say at this point is..GORE!!!?! …and DIEBOLD!
Jane’s up with a new post!
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..in-byrudy/
Loo Hoo. @ 136
It was too cool…ccmask posts “This”, I hit quote comment to say “This what?”…except, there was his comment, so I answer something, and the whole things comes back…blank…but you could see everything if you hit quote comment…then they fixed it, and it wasn’t as much fun anymore.
LS @ 135
I think we’re at the end of this cycles expansion, and heading into the recession. Whether this one will kick into depression or not, I don’t know, but I exect a protectionist backlash over the next few years and I expect a depression sometime in the next cycle or two. A lot will depend on how the next President and Congress handle things, which is why I’m getting very worried about how the Democratic nomination is going. (Clinton and Obama, in my opinion, will not make the fundamental changes needed. Edwards – not sure – but of the big 3 he’s the only one who looks like he might. Gore almost certainly would.)
I’ll probably write about the interesection of politics and economics and demographics and the 2008 election next week or the week after. I’m still thinking how to approach it.
Seems I read somewhere that Rudy was the front runner for prez. But Mittie was the predicted winner of the straw vote. I think that was based on the fact that the Mitt out spent everyone in Iowa. I think Romney basically bought the straw vote. I might be wrong.
Ian Welsh @ 141
Damn, we need Gore on so many fronts.
If I was going to go see Rudy speak, I would wear one of those disposable medical face masks. Everyone should.
Time for a new FDL float?
Hi Ian, Glad to see you’re writing about economics again more frequently. I always learn a bunch. I, for one, wouldn’t complain if you brought back your “John from Treasury” series with new entries.
Eric Gen @ 145
Hey Eric. The John Q. Treasury stories were a hoot to write, though probably not right for FDL. Perhaps I’ll put some together again.
Economics is beginning to get interesting again, it’s been a lot of hurry up and wait for a couple years now – waiting for the things predicted to actually happen.
Iran’s oil production is quite high see:
http://www.worldoil.com/INFOCE…..production
On the otherhand their refinery capacity my be low or they prefer to sell on the world market.
Here is a better webpage:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler……/World_Oil _Table.html
Iran production: 3.775
Iran consumption: 1.109
Sorry forgot units: Millions of barrels per day
From:
http://www.nationmaster.com/co…..ene-energy
Iran Oil Exports: 2.5 barrels per day
With reference to China, The wage disparity between US and Chinese workers is immense plus no prior retirees, and a low level of benifits paid by the employer. Due to the large labor force (700 million) it will take many years to raise wages to US/European levels.
Already China is exporting automobiles, generally the quality is low, but next time you are in China go by the Buick, or Audi, or Volkswagon etc. dealers. If China can take 10% of the US market, what will that do to GM and Ford?
“And an economy which isn’t creating new work, new products, as fast as it is rationalizing old work, has a problem. As an industry matures what took many highly skilled people to do, takes fewer and fewer over time and it becomes, packageable, routinized – and thus able to be shipped away from the area that created it – able to be done by second raters who aren’t at the cutting edge.”
“And this, to a large extent, is the situation the US finds itself in.”
The cutting edge is energy technology. Specifically related to automobiles, which enables our freedoms, and makes Exxon Mobile et als Rich!!! The suppression of “technology” that would render the present energy delivery system “dead” is the “industry” where America could lead the world, if allowed. The idea that 35 mpg fleet standard for US automakers is law now in 2007, three decades after the first 73′ oil embargo is about 35 years to late. What America does best is innovate, tinker and tweak existing tech to make it better. Unfortunately whether selling cigarettes, booze or gallons of gas it is all about short term profit and positive cash flow, even if it will kill you, long term. Instilled needs by corporate design, that where not needs at all, conditioned minds…….
Instead of America leading the way corporate interests are more concerned with protecting their interests for reasons of cost only. I summarize that the rule of law is “expendable” when it come to America’s energy needs……….
“Natural Selection Corporate T(r)eason and “Executive Oil”
Ian Welsh @ 21
The first widely held baloney was that we would keep the high tech-high value jobs and the menial tasks would go overseas. What hubris! As we have now woefully found out the obvious, the foreigners can do the high tech stuff better than we can. Another brain fart moment was when we never considered what the minions who live here and whom were doing those menial jobs were going to do when those jobs were shipped out. After all, they would have been doing more high tech stuff if they could, or if it was available. Which many of them couldn’t, and it wasn’t. So here we are. The largest employer in Arizona right now is Wal Mart. For many citizens, buying American is too expensive and too late for them and us all. A tax increase on the upper end is absolutely necessary to shrink the foreign debt we are taking on,and improve our dollars’ value.
Thanks for the economics lesson Ian. If you don’t mind, I’m going to print this out and save it in the school file for my son and his friends, who need to understand background and what has to be done when it comes their time to take the reins in our society. (It might come in handy as a “current events” discussion for one of the seniors in Economics class) I’m curious as to the differences in what we were taught in economics class way back in the late 70’s in high school, and whether the important points regarding imports and exports and currency values that you bring up in this post are at all emphasized. They’re going to inherit one massive debt – I hope we can prepare them.
CTuttle @ 28:
Too late for that unless you want to reinvent the wheel. Europeans, particularly the Germans, are already the world leaders in harnessing wind energy for power generation. Solar technology has moved far ahead in the last decade, again, Europe is the world leader in this. Europe has made a conscious decision to move away from nuclear energy and I hope the developing world would follow suit. There is a EU funded program in India which Germany is developing to manufacture and implement photo-voltaic cells for solar power generation. Andrew Leonard did a post on this a while back in How the World Works in Salon.com, available at http://www.salon.com/tech/htww…..index.html
Europeans paid a high price for this over the last 15 years where consumers have been offered the option of green energy at a higher price. Take up was phenomenal. This option is available in some Australian cities – depends on the State/Territory – in various guises ranging from a price differential, a flat surcharge, a surcharge that varies with consumption to determining the proportion of green energy consumption. Australia did some early work on solar technology but of late it is too focused on digging up its land for sale given the high price for commodities and substantial gas reserves.
Don’t know if anyone will see this, but there’s still some serious cause and effect logic in giving every Iraqi vet a $100,000 real estate bonus, to either put towards their home loan, or to use as a large down-payment to buy a new home.
That approximately 35-45 billion dollars would be a pure booster shot for the economy, instead of trickling back into the economy through the banks (aren’t we borrowing our own money then?) the Fed should administrate it through the VA directly into the real estatemarket.
The banks would bget immediate security on their existing loans, and it would be tax free, a one-time windfall write-off.
This puts a big patch directly on the sinking real-estate ship that is swamping all the other ships in our economic waters.
Stop the first domino from falling, the rest remain upright…
Ian
I don’t entirely understand your post so my questions may be off topic
1) I had heard just before the invasion Saddam Hussein was demanding payment in euros for Iraq’s oil instead of dollars. Do you know if this is true?
2) The fed injected 67 billion into the credit markets. I know the fed keeps bank reserves and changes interest when it loans them to other banks, but I don’t know that the fed issues a balance sheet. I guess the 67 billion was credit on some sort of account to be paid like a futures contract if someone demands it. What happens when the fed injects money? Is it all to bail out hedge funds and banks?
These were great reads!! but both incorrect.
We are at the point whereby producing ARMS is the only industry left standing. The war industry is the Cutting Edge.
The reason for the bailout is LIQUIDITY; but liquidity to deliver the vastly expanding new arms production cycle and the new rush to MINING to produce ever more materials to produce ARMAMENTS .. that is why the price of URANIUM is soaring! More nukes, more computer (they call it high tech) generated target systems!! All this started with THATCHER, who killed the entire UK economy under her WAY TOO LONG reign.
Henry the K was right “in there” then and is right in there NOW (Just came back from Moscow) trying to consolidate all the resources of the world for the elite. We are watching (in horror) as the Security and Prosperity Protocol is put into place and ALL of Canada’s and Mexico’s resources are laid at the feet of the US WARMONGERS. No coup d’etat necessary; it is already fait accompli .. these ruling individuals have long known how to bail themselves out.
The war for the Arctic is ON, the nukes are being moved into the Arctic region DAILY.
So’s who telling you this .. certainly not the mainstream, lamestream media . they, the owners of these megoliths, have THEIR dollars riding on more development!! Watch very carefully the ascent of MINING STOCKS .. or miss it if you just care to focus very narrowly on what is happening. The real news is in the mining newsletters these days!!
See, that is EXACTLY what they would tell YOU to do .. they would not suggest that halting mining activity would be a good idea if we are all to save our skins, and that is what it is down to now.
The panic for WHO? People who want to keep eating and working in SAFETY have plenty to be panicking about. In a few months try to get a job without an ID . and ID provided by employers! but issued by governments. Sound like fascism to YOU?
Really? Are we not ALL the messiah now? I mean seriously folks, there are OTHER problems besides Bush’s lack of credibility .. it’s the fracturization of all oppposition to warmaongering that is really the problem. We are forced to “attack” from many, many different fronts .. economic, political, social, physical (everything really is falling apart and Big Pharma and the insurance co.’s race for profits makes real health nearly impossible) .. and getting the Big Picture is nearly impossible.
This $130.2 billion dollar bailout is just something that hinders more people grasping what IS going for a bit longer, but the ruling elite has known for a long time. The last BIG BAILOUT was on 9/12/2000 (ring any bells) when $86 billion was pumped into the economy. Ca$h is pretty easy to print, iffen the presses don’t fall apart while its being printed. The Fed Reserve and the ECB have long known THAT.
Oh, the liquidity IS there .. for armament manufacturers and the governmets that need to pay THEM. Have a look around and see just how high the price tags on these weapons systems are, now much it is going to cost us all to have THEM control us with RFIDs, eyeball scanning, surveillance cameras, and on and on … there are vast vast vast sums of money to made off the byproducts of WAR .. including paying people to do psyops, counterintel pro activities .. and those companies (which include Checkpoint, the mercenary Blackwater, KBR, Halliburton, the Carlyle Group, and on and on)are doing right well thank you! Just as Exxon Mobil is making a KILLING keeping all them jets fueled, the military bases heated and doing VERY well at that; the last Q4 profits for them were the highest posted in human history! WOW!
What does this have to do with the collapse of the housing bubble? Well, folks, they mortgaged America to make it possible to keep issuing all those lovely Treasury bills and the dopey yuppies in the Great White States, just keep coming up with new structures to deliver the ca$h to create ever new and wonderful manufacturing plants for ARMAMENTS and running think tanks to figure out how to control everyone who disagrees with the utter control of weapons producers. There’s a “new kid” on the block in the model of the article; it’s the huge huge plant making every type of weapon, figuring out how to build a nuclear perimeter around everyone and control all the neighbors down the block, each one ratting out the other!!
In my opinion, this could be the GREATEST thing that ever happened. Hard on many many folks short term, very freeing in the LONG term. But with the profit system firmly in place, who’s paying attention? This PANIC is an opportunity for folks to finally grasp the picture, a real walk around the “neighborhood” is obviously the next step … I don’t think anyone is going to like what they see, EVEN IF their neighbors and family are working there.. It’s SCARY …
They were not irrational at all. The rationale being “do whatever it takes to keep the war industry going .. these ‘dupes’ will never “get” it . “
and they didn’t . .
and most still don’t.
Obviously, the House of Saud, the Bushes, Henry K, PM Brown (who controlled the UK purse strings for YEARS), and others clearly saw the rationality of what was going on and encouraged it every bit of the way. You can bet your last dollar they will continue to back the war machine, too! They have a PLAN, and it’s not benefit you or I in most cases.
Well, yeah, of COURSE they did . and the smart money now has moved onto mining stocks or if they haven’t, “well, that’s their loss” is the REAL thinking on the part of the ruling elite controlling the war industry. They’re redecorating THEIR homes with new fixtures in Moscow, in London, in DC and NYC, in Argentina, whrever their fancy takes them and their huge sense of ENTITLEMENT takes them .. and as landlords in our global city . they are throwing US, and other inconvenient “useless eaters” Out.
Ed Kunin @ 157:
Re (1): Yes it is true. He got UN approval to sell Iraqi oil for Euros rather than US$. The approval was granted because the USA had mandated sanctions against Iraq at the time which included ceilings on the US$ value of any import for Iraq.
Re (2): The Fed isn’t bailing out hedge funds with this recent injection of liquidity. It is lending to banks on one to three day recall of prime mortgage securities issued by outfits like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, etc. They are quasi government securities because a proportion of these are guaranteed by the Fed itself. Banks should be able to pay these back come Monday. The objective of this operation is to stop any escalation in the interest rate which is inevitable when money/credit dries up. European central banks have been doing the same since many EU banks have invested heavily in the credit derivatice market. Central banks, including the Fed, are essentially buying up some of the safer investments for a time limited period so that banks can keep on meeting their customer demand for liquid money. Once the time period ends, the banks repay the central banks and buy back these securities. These securities have higher loan premises, are NOT subprimes and are not considered bad loans.
Banks essentially make their profits from the difference in interest they charge and interest they pay out. Problem is they got far too inventive for their own good in devising of loans to make against questionable ‘assets’.
Ian Welsh @ 141
Ian,
question, I have quite a bit of bank stock in my IRA should I be concerned, very concerned?
Seems like all the people I discuss this with are basically uninterested.
PS Should have added that liquidity injection is a fairly common device that central banks do on a regular basis because since the late 1980s their primary role is to control inflation. This recent foray is news because of the size of this market intervention and also because the credit derivative market really had blown into a huge bubble since Greenspan’s time. A lot of these will go belly up because they are chasing illusory rather than real assets.
There is a serious policy issue here but I don’t see any comprehension of that from any of the candidates seeking Presidential nomination or Congress members.
There will be many more foreclosures but mostly at the middle and lower ends of the market. Top end of the housing market is likely to remain buoyant. Deafaults and bankruptcies too of a fair few hedge funds and subprime lenders unless they have much real assets outside the USA.
FDL should be asking politicians who they are going to bail out if such a package is considered by the Congress. Shady financiers or homeowners? Which homeowners?
How would you avoid another meltdown? However you look at it, this may be the start of the end of easy credit.
darclay @ 160
I’m not a good investment person (having no real money myself). However, I wouldn’t worry too much about banks – the FED will keep them a going concern and IRAs are long term investments – any short term declines shouldn’t matter too much to you unless you’re very close to retirement. I expect they’ll lose some value – liquidity doesn’t make bad loans magically good loans; or bad investments good investments, but the big boys won’t go under, or anything. Bernanke understands he can’t allow that to happen, his academic career was largely about the Great Depression.
As usual, remember, advice you get here is worth what you paid for it.
sona @ 161
Yeah, I wrote about how to do it, in a way that helps the borrowers, not the financiers and makes a profit for the government as well, here.
Thanks Ian for the reply and the link to your scheme. Makes sense. This is a bigger bust than the Savings and Loan fiasco with a wider global impact. I know that many Asian banks are also exposed to the fallout. Japan has had to act along with EU countries.
My concern is Bush and the Republicans aren’t in the slightest bit interested in bailing out borrowers. Bush may indeed thwart any Congressional attempt in that direction and argue instead for bailout for financiers and fall back on trickle down.
There is another concern, reading the comments to the link you posted above @ 163. Many Americans are too self centred, innumerate and have a mindset of ‘I’m a’rite jack’. I wish we covered more of Adam Smith and JM Keynes at high schools than we do. Keynes had the best argument of all for governments’ responsibilities towards ordinary people, as otherwise civic society is impossible. Perhaps coming from the other side of the Atlantic, he was more beware of the spectre of the masses’ penchant to storm the Bastille.
There should be more debate on the mechanisms to avoid a recurrence of this. Nothing really got fixed in the wake of of the S&L collapse almost 20 years ago. And here we are, walked into the same trap that created the 1930s depression despite numerous warnings over the last decade.
Who polices the lenders? The Fed has been remarkably quiescent re this. There needs to be an independent body but who should it report to? Who will exercise non partisan oversight? It should really be the Fed except it sees its primary role as keeping inflation in check.
BTW good exposition of comparative advantage in your post.
sona @ 159
I hate to be dense, but why are banks not liquid? the subprime stuff got sold to hedge funds or do some banks run hedge funds? If they are not liquid, how does this get cured over the weekend?
I’m not an economist and I can’t expect an economics course in the comments section, but I do not understand what is going on.
Great post Ian.
I also benefit from some good comments attached.