I’ve had a couple of very enjoyable chats this week with Red Symons, on the ABC Breakfast Show in Melbourne, and some friends have been trying to get me to throw some old Skyhooks song lines into the conversation–such as “Horror Movie” and the like (for any non-Australian and/or non-”Living in the Seventies” readers, Red was a guitarist–and played drums on the one occasion I saw them live, at Sydney University’s Union Building in the early ’70s–and lyricist; here is a link for the lyrics).
Though they’re definitely apt, the piece of 70’s music that most came to mind when I spotted this new feature on the US Federal Reserve’s website this morning was from The Carpenters (which in contrast to The Skyhooks, was not one of my favourite bands): “We’ve only just begun“.
It’s an interactive map of the subprime and alt-A mortgage catastrophe in the United States. The numbers, which are also available for download as Excel spreadsheets, are simply staggering.
The scariest part of the data relates to what are known as ARMs (“Adjustable Rate Mortgages”)–fixed rate mortgages that began with a “teaser” low rate, and then reset after a number of years to a higher rate (the standard US mortgage is a fixed rater, unlike Australia where variable rate mortgages are the norm).
Of the almost 3 million subprime loans (the precise number is 2,919,604, representing 2.5% of America’s 115,904,641 housing units), almost 2/3rds are ARMs (the national average is 62.9%), and just over 30% of them will reset to the higher rate in the next 12 months (with another 10% to follow over the next two years).
That’s why this crisis has “only just begun”. There are two sides to this catastrophe, and whatever is done about it, one side or the other is bankrupt.
IF the ARMs go ahead, then the number of American households that will go bankrupt is at the minimum 1 million–because there’s no way these borrowers can pay the higher rate. At the simplest scale, this is because the rates will rise from an already high average rate of 8.8% to a usurious 14.8%. But on top of this, the effective rate for the loans throughout has been the higher rate–and the gap between this and the initial teaser rate was capitalised onto the debt.
So a borrower who took out a loan in 2006 of $183,900 (the average subprime loan size–note by the way how small this is compared to median Australian housing loans), and whose loan resets to the higher rate next year, will go from paying 8.8% on 183,900 to paying 14.8% on $219,200–a doubling of annual interest payment commitments, from $16,180 to $32,440.
This for a cohort of borrowers who are already massively behind on their payments–though not as massive as it will get (currently 10% are behind 30-60 days, 5% 60-90 days, 10% 90 days plus, and 11% are in foreclosure). There’s no way they can manage this: they are, as the Americans put it, “toast”.
But what if they are freed from this obviously onerous burden by legislative fiat? Then the people and institutions who bought the residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBSs) that these mortgages finance are “toast”: the bonds will be next to worthless.
And it won’t end there. After the subprimes come the “Alt-A” mortgages–ones not high enough grade to qualify as prime, but above subprime in past credit history. There are roughly 2 1/4 million of them, with much higher debt levels (average of US$321,000), lower average interest rates (6.6%), currently lower default rates (5.6%–half as many in foreclosure as the subprimes), and lower levels of arrears (just over 10% behind, versus 25% of the subprimes).
But just over half of them also have ARMs, and about half of them are scheduled to reset to a 3% higher rate in 2010 or later. By then, economic conditions will have deteriorated so much that their own finances will be “subprime” at the time, and the snowball will continue rolling down the Highway to Hell.
So We’ve Only Just Begun. And it is a Horror Movie, though not “right there on your TV”–if you’re American, you’re living in it.
And if you’re not American, then it’s still almost guaranteed that some of your investments will suffer–whether indirectly if you own shares or property, or directly if you or an agency that affects you purchased the RMBSs that funded the subprime scam. You may well wish that you were still “Living in the Seventies“.






September 19th, 2008 at 10:49 am
ACDC – Highway to Hell would also be appropriate. For something obscure try Blue Oyster Cult – Summer of Love http://www.mp3lyrics.org/b/blue-oyster-cult/this-aint-the-summer-of-love/.
Maybe “Million Dollar Riff” needs to be “Trillion Dollar Riff” and “All my Friends are Getting Married” could be changed to “All My Friends are Getting Mortgages”.
I wouldn’t even admit to knowing who the Carpenters are or were.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Well, I did want to finish by saying that Karen C died of anorexia, just as the US economy is about to do…
But yes Ken, I think you’re on to something here. We need a Subprime Album, and there’s material aplenty out there for it–Eve of Destruction could become “Eaves of Destruction” for instance.
Perhaps the band could be Alan Greenspan and the Subprimes?
September 19th, 2008 at 11:39 am
The mantra everywhere is ‘Balance sheet’ (RBA Treasurer, PM, the Banks, the Public), I rarely hear ‘net income’! The rational intrinsic value of an asset is based on ‘net income’. The denial of this fundamental connection is why everything financial is blowing up and why it will also blow up in Australia. Lending should only be based on ‘net income’ with a large margin of safety, the ‘Balance sheet’ is largely irrelevent.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:51 am
As our rates are variable, the Reserve Bank has slightly higher control over the end rate. It still comes down to debt over income. Does the different strata of mortgages in America – sub prime mortgage / subprime income, Alt-A mortgage / Alt-A income equate to the Australian story. I understand that for those with mortgages in Australia the ratio is much higher!
Also due to the recourse nature of Australian mortgages – the only end is bankruptcy, which destroys credit card repayments and auto loans?
September 19th, 2008 at 11:55 am
On youtube there’s a guy called Mr Mortgage, his user name is markmti. He has a wonderful series of vids talking about the different types of loans and the underlying figures.
In short the alt a and option arm are 4 times as big as the subprime so you only need a 1/4 of the default rate for them to have the same impact. If the default rate is higher than a 1/4 of the subprime ones then…… anyway I digress
This is his “Mr Mortgage on the Pay Option ARM Implosion”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjY8xVewrPg
September 19th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
History will repeat. Alan Greenspan and the Subprimes after initial success with an album financed by borrowing from family and friends will sign to a major record company with an advance of $20 to record their first album. After 7 years of recording and costs blowing out to $50million, and constant reminders from Greenspan that this is good for the recording industry the album will be completed. Sales will be abysmal and their record company bankrupt. Greenspan will retire to his mansion complaining about the way the record business is run and pointing out that they are wasting too much money on new artists.
September 19th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
The new talent, Greenspan’s estranged son with grass roots support starts a band called. “Greenspam and the Subslime” with a new rendition of:
“Take a load off Fanny”
“Take a load off Fanny, take a load for free;
“Take a load off Fanny, and (and) (and)
“You put the load right on me.”
The Band, “The Weight,” 1968
And a chopped version of:
“Those were the days my friends.”
“Those were the days my friends.”
“We’d live the life we’d choose
“We’d fight and never lose
“Those were the days, oh yes, those were the days.”
September 19th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
It will be just as bad in Australia because all the income/interest ratios are similar. Notice the concentration of this debt. (Which is exactly what is destroying asset prices) That’s also similar in Australia, only 1/2 of Australian households have a mortgage, of that number 1/2 owe >50%. The rest of the finacial system is relying on their ability to service this debt. The CBA add springs to mind “It’s called equity mate”… How misleading can advertising be?… WRONG MATE, IT’S DEBT!
September 19th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
This information is readily available for the USA, and it is indeed scary. The situation is not as bad here, but neither is it at all transparent. A tightening in credit and sharp correction in the housing market could still trigger significant pain for banks and holders of RMBS paper, but it’s hard to make a realistic estimate.
I wonder if Glen Stevens knows. I wonder how he really sleeps at night.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Another scary point about the numbers on the Fed’s website is the LTV (Loan to Valuation Ratio). The Sub-primes have an average LTV of 94%. That means for 50% of borrowers house prices need to fall only 7% for there to be negative equity (house prices down over 20% across the board). It then stands to reason that many more than 50% of sub-P loan customers owe more than their house is worth. Why keep paying? Thus causing the debt to blow out quickly and the house to fall in value much further.
The average LTV for Alt_As is 81.3%, so at least 50% of those borrowers have negative equity as well.
The LTVs don’t include second mortgages held by another entity or any credit cards/car loans, etc, etc. So the problem is much much worse.
There are $537B Sub-P loans and $725B Alt-As. Big numbers. No to mention the trillions in Prime loans where a percentage have negative equity and the owners have lost their jobs.
The market already knows all this and that is why the bond market and the CDS markets are blowing up.
The rumour doing the rounds today is that the Fed will be “working on a plan all weekend” that will save the market. I wonder if they are going to call in Bruce Willis of Die Hard fame?
The speculation is that the Fed will buy and store all non-performing assets and store them on their balance sheet, never to be seen again.
Is this Japan Mark II or does this mean US interest rates will skyrocket and that the US dollar will collapse? How could this work? What plan could they have that they haven’t already tried?
September 19th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Fantastic work Steve. If you think OZ has a property bubble you should see the one swelling here in the UAE. Prices here rose 42% in 10 weeks, absolutely insane. A recent article in the business section of the Kahleej Times quoted an un named British banker stating that the NAB and ANZ banks in OZ have exposures to the CDO / SIV market of around $6-7 billion which will have to be written down before Christmas. I work in the oil industry and can tell you that crude prices will be back up around $160 -180 per barrel before December 2009, therefore I am now rehearsing, ” Gimme Shelter, Paint it Black & You got the Silver”
September 19th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
The US Government, will in effect, print money if they decide to take the ‘bad debt’ off the books of the banks. That will destroy the bond value of foreign lenders. Long bond interest rates will rise because the effect will get transfered to currency exchange rates and the volume of foreign Financing via the ‘Yen carry’ etc. This foreign financing will decline until the risk of loss is fully priced into the cost of money. This scenerio will significantly impact New Zealand and Australia as we also compete for the same foreign money.
September 19th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Steve can you help out here and supply more precise figures, because in part, it’s the concentration of debt in the community that makes this so unstable?
I roughly estimate 1/4 of all Australian households are attempting to service roughly 2/3 of the $1000B mortgage debt at 9%. That’s roughly $100B of after tax wages/incomes attempting to service $60B of mortgage interest.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Hello All
Could I make a contribution to the play list. Sorry they are from an era earlier that the 70’s.
What OZ and the US needs now are “Pennies from Heaven”.
And for descriptions of the Australian economy you can’t go past “16 Tons”.
On the “minerals boom”;
“You load 16 tons and what do you get,
Another day older and deeper in debt”
On the question of economic mortality;
“St. Peter don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go,
I owe my soul to the company store.”
And on the question of government intellect;
“A mind that’s weak and a back that’s strong”.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Steve,
I have just become aware of your website after hearing your discussion on Late Night Live. For me, a non economist, your pieces are very informative.
I first started to wonder about the validity of the overly optimistic comments often heard from bank economists four years ago, after hearing a piece on Ockhams Razor (ABC radio national, April 2005) titled “Housing Afordability Measures Under the Spotlight.” This critical and well argued piece concludes with “The only way to conclude this review of economic rationalists’ performance is to say that they have shown themselves to be everything they critisised in others. They are deluded. they are a threat to our economic wellbieng”
From then on I then started to pay attention to the Bears……
Keep it up
September 19th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
The bigger issue here is… Asian banks have deposit/loan ratios of 2:1 and the OECD countries have deposit/loan ratios of 1:2 To be absolutely simplistic… When you have excess deposit/savings and a close on zero interest rate, and a government willing to aggresively defend exchange rates, any wonder the asset inflation and consequent asset or currency deflation has been exported.
September 19th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
Finance and music not a likely combo but.. hey
Take A Load Off Fannie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=712kRqri2No
September 19th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Brightspark at 5.16pm,
v.good!
“And for descriptions of the Australian economy you can’t go past “16 Tons”.
On the “minerals boom”;
“You load 16 tons and what do you get,
Another day older and deeper in debt””
September 19th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Well, it looks like Paulson fired the Bazooka. That wasn’t big enough so he is about to deploy the Nukes….
My understanding of this latest “solution” is hazy (I guess given that Ben and Hank have to whip together a solution to all this mess on the back of an envelope over a couple of beers tonight doesn’t help), but the FED/Treasury is about to take on all of this toxic debt from all financial institutions.
Surely this is a big liability? The FEDs balance sheet looks like a stock take at a local cash converters at the moment. They are currently issuing emergency Treasuries to give a little buffer room. Aren’t people worried about this?
Who would buy Treasuries at the moment? Obviously someone is as yields are down, but I just wonder how long that will last as I seriously question the US governments ability to pay back their dues. When you loan to someone with dubious credit, you ask a higher risk premium on the money you lend. What is the USA’s risk premium going to be going forward?
If this little save doesn’t work, or foreigners stop buying US debt, watch out because there are no more bullets.
September 20th, 2008 at 2:42 am
Just saw an announcement that US Gov has banned short selling on about 800 stocks. No more free market, if it wasn’t already obvious. In fact I don’t think you can call it a market anymore, but I’m not sure what the right word would be. (except for a few broad Aussie expressions)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Buying the “toxic” debt??
At what price will they pay? Current market prices would result in huge losses for the current bond holders and banks. What are they calling toxic? Is it just Sub-P and Alt-A or does it extend to Prime securities. Any RMBS (Prime or not) bundled in the last two years would have many borrowers who have negative equity. If you start to include that debt, the numbers would go well over 2 or even $3 Trillion.
There is also no talk about the credit card back bonds (disaster area) or the commercial property backed bonds (total disaster area, with property values falling and vacancies rising). The US went gar gar for these securities and they wrote them against any sort of debt you can think of. Even student loan backed bonds.
The US Government would be better off letting Wall Street fend for itself and start caring for the man in the street. One plan would be to use all that money to buy houses. By buying houses they would put a floor under the price. Also they could rent the houses cheaply to families in need. Defaults would stop rising and values would begin being restored.
Then they should start serious talks centred around completely reforming this doomed debt based system. Yeah right! Like that’s going to happen in America.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Swapping 1 trillion of ‘good debt’ for ‘bad debt’ will cause long term interest rates to rise because of the increase in ‘good bond’ supply. In essence, either the US government has to offer a yield that attracts buyers (or they have to print money). One posible effect may be that US bond yields will become more attractive than Australian long term bonds. Australia (& New Zealand) compete for funding because of the CAD. That’s not good for Australian interest rates or the AUD.
September 20th, 2008 at 10:58 am
I was watching CNBC when this was announced. Now CNBC is just a bunch of Cheerleaders for Wall St, the Govt. and the Fed. When it was announced, Mark Haines, an anchor on ‘Squawk on the street” got right out of his tree over using taxpayer money to bail out Wall St. I wonder if he will still be there on Monday? I thought ‘things are in trouble here when these blokes start to revolt’
September 20th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Hey john c, I hadn’t expected a clip ready.
Re: Take A Load Off Fannie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=712kRqri2No
September 20th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Bullturnedbear, there is no market price, as no one will buy at any reasonable price. The banks are surviving based on the valuations. The problem is that if there is a run on the bank they will be forced to sell and will have to go into bankruptcy. The assumption was that teh Fed wouldn’t let that happen but they have, so all the banks are now hoarding money.
Provided the formula the Fed comes up with is close to the valuations then everyone will be happy, the banks will take their losses and it looks like the US government isn’t spending any money. Then at some future date the US government starts selling the debt and if the valuations are OK then the US taxpayers will be happy, otherwise it will be a huge loss to the US. I expect the latter.
September 20th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Apparently Bernanke scared the hell out of the senators, claiming we were days away from a financial metldown:
Go to:
http://abcnews.go.com/WN
then click on “Congress “Scared Straight”"
I am not buying that the problem has been solved. Ben and Hank pulling a couple of all nighters this weekend will not make up for the years of credit binging. One day the world is going to wake up and no longer buy US or western debt, government backed or otherwise. The bad debts have been made and shuffling it around will not avert the problem. The system needs to take its medicine.
I could see the irony a mile off when Bernanke, the greatest scholar of the great depression was made the FED chief.
September 20th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Can we really forecast with any probability beyond chance how this crisis will turn out? From my understanding about complex systems there are too many unforeseen variables ( “Black Swans”) that hit the system and generate changes that generally do not have a linear trajectory. Can anyone say that there comes a time when the variables are so extraordinary, as we have today, that complex systems revert closer to a linear model and as a result forecasting can be done with high certainty? If that is true, wouldn’t the market reflect that sentiment, or are we to assume the market participants collectively are in denial about our short or mid term future?
I guess what I wonder about is if those who review and analyze these markets look at data in a way that attempt to give support to his or her bias? Perhaps we are really at a stage where “doom and gloom” is a foregone conclusion.
September 20th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
We have several big economies in the world but they are using different rules/systems. The economies that are generating savings are pumping it back into economies that are not saving. Some exchange rates are manipulated or pegged and some interest rates are artificially low or high. Capital flows often for artifical reasons. This creates bubbles & busts. All the major economies need to agree to use the same rules or this will keep happening.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:01 am
mikesblack, forecasting at it’s best is fairly unreliable. What can be predicted is that levels of debt will return to something sustainable, but how they get there is a mystery. Hopefully it will occur in an orderly way but there are alternatives.
What the US has been trying to avoid is the situation where the financial system locks up. Lending stops which means that asset prices will really collapse, possibly dropping below their long term value, defaults are massive and it just gets worse. On the other hand they don’t want to push too much money into the economy, inflation will rise, requiring higher interest rates or risking severe problems (think Zimbabwe). What causes problems is when otherwise productive businesses shut down, for example manufacturing. Is there a not so happy medium ? We’re going to find out.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:22 pm
It was always going to be difficult for the US to navigate deflating this asset bubble. This is one of those situations where being the reserve currency has its downsides especially when significant trading partners peg against it. The late 1990’s asset bubbles in the ‘asian tigers’ were sorted out relatively quickly when their currency declined, it helped solve their problem. A 50% drop in the AUD would go a long way toward preventing the inevitable here.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:52 pm
The willingness of financial intermediaries to borrow Yen at 1%, convert it to Australian Dollars and lend it to Australians at 9% to fund their mortgages seems to show no limits. If this ‘truely is’ such a great financial idea why don’t Australians ‘go direct’ It would be several percent cheaper for Australian homeowners to cut out all the financial middle men and borrow direct from Japan. Of course someone has to take the currency risk.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:21 pm
What happens if, heaven forbid, the general public gets whipped into a frenzy by the Australian media and starts withdrawing all its cash from the banks?? (ie a bank run). I don’t think that there is a guarantee on cash in Australian banks, whereas deposits in the US are guaranteed for up to $100K…
September 21st, 2008 at 10:16 pm
I read today that Stephen is liquidating his home into “cash” and going rental. Fair enough, however the “cash” has to reside somewhere, but where?…. is he going to put it under the mattress? I went “cash” 18 months ago and have been sitting back smugly waiting for the sh*t to hit the fan. However, now that the sh*t has well and truly hit the fan, my level of comfort has diminished somewhat as I now hear/read that being “cash” ain’t as safe as it was made out to be! Any opinions on the vulnerability of “cash” funds?
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:09 am
I remember early last month on this site we were discussing Australia’s debt binge and the discussion went something like this:
“Will the debt bubble burst now or later?” The conclusion seemed to be. “We think now, but for the problem to be averted the levels of debt would need to keep rising”. “The problem with that though, would be that the crash would be worse later”. “What goes up must come down! A crash cannot be avoided, it’s just a matter of time”.
So what is America trying to do? They are increasing their overall levels of debt to fight against a debt binge. They are borrowing more money to buy debt that everyone already knows cannot be paid back (has gone bad). In other words they are delaying the inevitable and the resulting crash will be worse, with ultimately more to pay back. These guys are much smarter than me though, so what am I missing? Why are they doing this?
The second problem I see (thinking like a banker for a minute). As a borrower the US are becoming increasingly risky by the day. Their economy is going into recession, leading to their ability to generate income (taxes) falling. Their debt and social costs are rising dramatically meaning that their ability to pay is falling. They are looking more like a bad borrower themselves.
Where are all you smart cookies out there? What are the US Treasury trying to do? Maybe they are planning to inflate their economy in an attempt to pay back the debt more cheaply. (If the lenders wake up to this though, they will run for the hills and the system will crash instantly) I can’t believe they just have their heads in the sand. They must have a plan, I just can’t make sense of what they are trying to do.
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:48 am
The US is doing pretty much what Japan did early 1990’s, because they are in a similar situation, a Debt deflation, a Depression.
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:55 am
Hi Peter W,
If that’s the case and it’s as simple as that. Why take on more debt? It only makes the problem worse. They must be thinking something else is going to happen.
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I did a paper in 2003 that showed that the risk levels being carried in equities were much higher than the standard formulas gave. If we add in the real risk levels of all the ‘new’ debt based products, the True Risk levels were immense. Even normal random perturbations would have been enough to wipe out capital reserves when gearing levels are too high.
The reaction I got was both interesting and telling, that is nothing. Except for a few people who in private agreed that the tools they were using was wrong “but everyone used them so we have to”.
Greed + Stupidity + Herd Instinct + Cognitive Dissonance = Collapse, everytime.
The sad thing is that it didn’t happen sooner, if it had all gone belly up in (say) 2002 it would have been far more manageable. It is now far too big, for anything but drastic surgery.
Me? I’d break the mortgage contracts, let Wall St go down, but protect and re-capitalise the trading banks and other critical institutions. At least consumer spending in the US would bottom out as consumers realised they owned their houses outright. No credit available, sure, but a floor would be set. Maybe te difference between a bad recession and the depression we face.
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm
This is a cost transfer of private default to the national level i.e. Socialization of the private debt default. The macro effect is the US will save more (it will be forced to pay the defaults off through taxes). The assets will deflate until they reach a price point where private savings & income are sufficient to reaquire the assets.
September 22nd, 2008 at 1:04 pm
The simplistic view is… If the US can keep 3/4 of the economy functional and paying taxes, they will sholder the burden of paying off the mistakes of the other 1/4.
September 22nd, 2008 at 1:22 pm
What Benanke & Paulson need to achieve quickly is keeping the largest fraction ratio of ‘functional economy paying taxes’ that they can. Benanke is the man for the job. He’s a scholar of the 1930 depression! He knows that genuine businesses that actually make the widgets the world wants and needs, relies on a functional banking system, working capital etc, or it all gets much worse than it needs to.
September 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Hi Peter,
They are not simply socializing the private default, because the borrowers are still being bashed by the debt. On top of this the Fed is raising fresh debt to take that risk over. The Banks are simply being freed of the debt (not the borrower).
It also occurred to me that sentiment on “main street” is still the most important factor here. The Fed is saying they want to free the banks of the “toxic debt” so they “can” lend again. I think the borrowers are too negative, because of falling house prices and fear of job losses to borrow and be hurt again. Also the banks will be too cautious to start lending heavily again, because the losses and fear of more are too fresh in their mind.
It seems this bail out is designed to save the depositors. The Fed was afraid of a run on the banks. It will be interesting to see how long they can prop up the dam walls. Once the realization sinks in that the Fed can’t stop this problem the depositors will start demanding their money again and the system will face the same fate.
I believe the bond international holders/lenders still hold the key. When the cash rich countries wake up and fear takes hold of them the money will stop flowing in and the game will be up. Until a bottom is found and it makes commercial sense to start lending money again.
September 22nd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Red played guitar, not drums. I hope your economic forecasts are as good as your knowledge of popular Aus music.
September 22nd, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Hi folks and thanks for all the analysis.
For me, the question is where to we go from here?
A wise friend once told me that you can only patch an old water tank so many times before you simply bite the bullet and get a new one.
OK, lets get a new one. A new alternative economy.
It can be started now to parallel the old system. Kind of makes sense to me to make positive moves if we truly believe that the old has had it’s day!
I would be curious to hear your thought on starting this from a grass roots level and letting it develop.
Stay well,
September 22nd, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Hi Mike!
If we don’t even trust ‘cash,’ then the only place to run to is physical gold (not the paper gold, though).
Then there is another worry for our superannuation. Many of the ‘cash’ in super funds are cash management trust (CMT). They exist in the form of liquid debt instruments in the money markets. Deposits may be insured in due time ($20k deposit insurance is in the pipeline), but what about ‘cash’ in CMT? It is technically not deposits and hence, cannot be insured (correct me if I’m wrong on that). So, ‘cash’ is as secure as the liquidity in the money markets.
September 22nd, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Had actually thought of bypassing cash entirely.
As to the old, yes, there will be pain. And those (like me) who do not have cash or a super account will also be feeling the pain, just as much as those who have. Mind you, I have less expectations and am happy to lead a simpler life. I think that consumption (lifestyle) needs to be balanced with production.
If you are familiar with the general principles of a L.E.T.S system (sophisticated barter using a medium of exchange) then this can be a potential alternative worth considering.
These systems can make a quantum leap and work well on the proviso that they are broad-based.
And it is also a zero-sum game, but production and consumption are balanced, and without speculation.
I feel Steven Keen is absolutely right in that there can be no speculation on assets if we want to avoid Kondratieff cycles of boom and bust.
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Peter and bullturnedbear,
You both have some interesting comments. As I understand it, Bernanke
believes that the causes of the Great Depression 1.0 were
predominantly due to the reaction of the then FED and policy makers. I
am sure there were a lot of smart people trying to fix the problems
back then, but they would have hit their heads against a brick wall
many times. It will be very interesting to see how the academic
solution plays out in the real world. I am no economist but intuition
tells me that when the root cause of the problems comes home to roost,
there is not a lot you can do except hope that things unwind in an
orderly manner. Let us hope that Bernanke’s solutions plays out
accordingly. Unfortunately, the fact that Ben thought things were
“Contained”, the fact that he has tried numerous solutions already and
they have not worked tells me he is probably starting to realize that
the solutions he thought might work on paper are not so obvious in the
real world where the market will ultimately take matters into its own
hands. Personally, I believe that you cannot fool the market. No
matter what you tweak in one direction, the market will take in the
other. I wish Ben and Paul all the best, but I am not holding my
breath.
Everyone is going to be ultra unhappy with the outcome when asset
prices decline – but let us hope this plays out like Japan did where
you can make the case that they did not endure political upheaval,
enjoyed a reasonable standard of living but did have to suffer the
asset price deflation. Unfortunately the social fabric of the USA (and
the West in general) is a lot different – so this little experiment
may not turn out as nice. Let’s hope for the Great Deflation 2.0 as
opposed to the Great Depression 2.0.
September 22nd, 2008 at 7:33 pm
I did not hear what Steve had to say on radio today but I fundamentally agree…
I’ll paraphrase
The two choices are…
Protect the creditors = The Great Depression
The Wiemar Republic = Print money = Hyper inflation = Theft of value from the creditors
I don’t know how this will play out.
I do think Australia is close to being in a similar situation to the USA, UK, NZ, etc.
Australia ranks very low on the OECD household savings list (along with the aforementioned). The return on Australian assets is very low. At some point the ‘Boomers’ will need to monetise their assets into a low saving base economy.
I never understood why the 9% compulsory superannuation got recycled back through the financial system (minus fees)to provide a 9% return at best (funding these 9% mortgages) at a price that will deliver a 7% return on assets.
I suspect, as this all unravels in Australia the superannuation system will be ‘drawn down’ to decrease debt leverage on spirallingly lower priced assets, and it may all feed on itself.
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:21 pm
If everyone steps back 100 meters and looks at the problem from a simplistic perspective… It all comes down to ‘who will pay’
1. The USA = Depression
2. International Creditors = Print Money
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Peter,
I do see us on a precipice at the moment with deflation on one side and rampant inflation on the other. Ultimately I think deflation will take hold.
The reason why I don’t think printing money will work is because if they start this, foreigners will dump treasuries as well as the dollar. Up goes commodities, oil and yields on treasuries. This will hurt main street and further depress asset values. The money printed will just go to the hands of the banks, which will then find a home in the safety of commodities as they remain zombified like they were in Japan. It won’t go to those in debt and it won’t go to consumers.
Wouldn’t hyperinflation literally require money being printed and placed into the hands of the population? I can’t see this happening (although never say never – if those stimulus checks start creeping up in dollar value, you will know this is what the government is trying to do).
I am really interested in this. While I do tend to think the choices are deflation or rampant inflation, I think the probability of the former is lower, perhaps 15%.
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:40 pm
History votes with you. The USA & Australia have had more debt induced depressions than hyperinflations, although Australia has inflated more than the USA… 1900 AUD = $2.40 2008 AUD = $0.83