1930s-style collapse haunts economy
Commentary: Why near-term rate increases are unlikely
By Lou Barnes, Monday, June 30, 2008.Mortgages are sticky near 6.5 percent, Treasurys getting most of the flight-to-quality benefit from the stock market dive.
Economic data this week were slim and predictable: Consumer confidence fell again, and rebate checks plumped May spending and income, but gave no durable, corner-turning boost. The "personal consumption expenditure deflator" in the spending/income report confirmed the remarkable (and painful) "core" inflation performance, only a 0.1 percent gain: Prices for everything except food and energy are on or over the edge of deflation.
This week was all Fed and markets. Analysts' responses to the Fed's meeting have described two different economies and mutually exclusive policy responses: one, the mainstream view that the economy is too weak for the Fed to raise its rate; the second that inflation-fighting and dollar-defense are paramount.
The disagreement itself is traditional, but the extraordinary situation -- energy shock combined with 1930-style banking collapse and unprecedented emerging-market growth and trade and currency stress -- has added extraordinary heat and uncertainty.
There also appears to be an unusual political divide between the two views: The insurgents are right-side and stock-market champions in editorial dominance at CNBC, the WSJ, and Fox, joined by a few hard-headed and punishing characters in the Fed's own regional banks. The credit markets from late May until this week traded with the insurgents: The economy was not so bad, and the Fed should and would begin by August a sustained series of rate increases. Thus market rates rose in anticipation. The Fed's post-meeting statement made clear that near-term rate increases are unlikely, and the inflation/dollar defenders immediately accused the Fed of a lack of courage.
The object of the dispute is the Fed's set-point for the overnight cost of money, at 2 percent deemed too low by the insurgents. They claim that if the Fed began to raise it, the dollar would strengthen, dollar-denominated oil prices would fall, and so would inflation.
Possibly as late as the 1980s, this claim might have had merit; today's world is much more interdependent and resistant to unilateral action of this and other kinds. To fight inflation, so long as you're not printing money (we're not), you must slow your economy. I get from the policy insurgents either a belief in miracle cure without economic pain, or deception about just how slow they want the economy to get. In dollar defense, none of these people have a plan for the damage done by a $2 billion dollar per day excess of imports over exports -- Warren Buffett's well-made point.
The Fed funds rate is relative to many things: 2 percent today versus 5.25 percent last August, and the European Central Bank's 4 percent, must be measured in relation to overall credit conditions, which are extremely -- possibly ruinously -- tight. A low funds rate is the only way the Fed can help the banking system to rebuild capital: earnings from wide short-long spreads.
My only quarrel with the Fed's statement is its claim that "Downside risks to growth ... have diminished somewhat." Mr. Buffet on Wednesday: "I watch kind of a lot of real-time data, and the economy is weakening -- if anything, weakness accelerating." Amex said that its June customer credit indicators had deteriorated "beyond our expectations." New purchase mortgage applications are two weeks into an 8 percent per week compound decline. OFHEO's balanced, broad, and nonhysterical measure of home prices finally began to decline in April.
Energy, commodity and food prices are out of control, but asset prices are deflating, houses and now stocks; the Dow is down 14 percent for '08, 19 percent since October. In evidence of terminal capital exhaustion, the DJ Wilshire Bank Index has lost half of its value in just 16 months. Chrysler denied plans to file for bankruptcy. This week.
The Fed is playing this just right: Fly the economy just above stall speed, because a stall might be catastrophic. Those who think a deep recession is a better idea should say so. The Fed needs help in the form of Asian/emerging slowdown; how, when, and with what political consequences there, I do not know, but it is coming.
Lou Barnes is a mortgage broker and nationally syndicated columnist based in Boulder, Colo. He can be reached at lbarnes@boulderwest.com.
***
What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor. To contact the writer, click the byline at the top of the story.
All rights reserved. This article may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.


Add A Comment
You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Peter Tremulis on June 30, 2008 - 6:10am.
With banks lagging in maintaining required reserves for bad loans, it seems we are heading more into a serious recession where the federal government will likely again have to wade in and either prop up some of the banks or establish an equivalent to The Resolution Trust Corporation. Already, B of A, Wachovia and others are beginning to be overwhelmed with large and small loan defaults. Many of the real estate funds are in default on thier major loans and are turning over the keys on properties and entities alike. With US investors being banged around again by the stock market, this downturn will only increase the rate of off shore ownership of or US core financial brands and remaining industrial sectors. When will Washington and the FED realize that without a manufacturing base here in the US, we cannot sustain an economy based upon service sector businesses alone?
Submitted by Lonny Coffey on June 30, 2008 - 6:59am.
I enjoy Lou's articles but I must say he speaks way over my head. I get most of it but it is kind of like drinking from a fire hose for this ole boy.
Submitted by Ryan Elliott on June 30, 2008 - 11:31am.
I for one am praying for an iterest rate increase. If no one is buying anything, why lower interest rates? People will slow down on discretionary spending, like new cars, TVs, dinner out, Ipods, etc.. People will not/can not stop spending money on staples and energy. People need fuels for their cars, food on the table, and energy for their home, everything else can wait. Inflation caused by the weak dollar (and many other factors) is causing these items to go through the roof. We need to do what we can to strengthen the US dollar and slow inflation down. People will begin to spend again when they are not emptying their bank accounts to fill up their cars and buy groceries!
Ryan Elliott
ryanassist@gmail.com
Submitted by Rob Aubrey on June 30, 2008 - 4:47pm.
Can expound more on what this means "1930-style banking collapse"
Submitted by D. Sullivan on July 1, 2008 - 12:12am.
Banks in the 30s operated on thin deposit reserves and failed as the economy went stale.
Today's major investment banks are choking on their own failed structured finance products. Surely some large banks would have failed already if the Fed hadn't accepted their damaged paper as collateral and kept rates low to help banks profit from the spread.
Problem is, many adjustable rate loans are tied to indexes that are staying high or going higher. This would be fine for banks if loans were performing well, bet they aren't. Banks can borrow from the Fed's discount window at 2.25% and loan it out at 6.5%, but their existing loans are going south as borrowers are walking away from devalued homes.
I'm not seeing much of Henry Paulson's much touted rate relief negotiations. Structured finance contracts are too overwhelmingly complex for CDO and MBS managers to conduct work-outs, I suspect, so the foreclosure march continues.
Thanks to Lou Barnes for another thought provoking and informative commentary.