As I’ve noted here earlier, the blog newsfrom1930 performs a very valuable ”reality check” for today by each day publishing a summary of the Wall Street Journal from the same day in 1930. The overwhelming flavour of reports from that time is that the Depression was over and recovery was imminent. Plus la change…
This week it’s offering another service–publishing summaries of news reports from one year earlier: 1929. The reason, of course, is that we are approaching the 80th anniversary of “Black Tuesday“: the day in 1929 when the Dow Jones fell for more than 10 percent for a second day in a row, bringing to an emphatic end the bull market of 1929 and ushering in the Great Depression.
Newsfrom1930’s coverage began on October 24th, since the market’s serious fall really began the day before with a 6.3% drop (which was duly reported in the next day’s Wall Street Journal).
The entire blog post on October 24th 1929 is reproduced below, but I do recommend reading it in the original as well:
Thursday, October 24, 1929: Dow 305.85 -20.66 (6.3%)
[Note: Your regularly scheduled 1930 news will be along later in the day, but first a commemorative special. This day in 1929 was roughly the start of what's known as the Great Crash, which lasted about a week. I'm going to give a quick summary for each day, to give an idea of how it played out. As with the 1930 news, the summary is from the WSJ on each day in 1929, so it describes the action from the previous day. So the following describes Wednesday, Oct. 23 - note this is not one of the legendary “Black” days yet.]
Market wrap: Bears resumed aggressive operations, “combed the list during the morning for issues in a weakened state,” attacking Bethlehem Steel, Hahn Dept. Stores, Hayes Body, and others. Selling spread to the main trading stocks in the noon hour, picking up momentum on increasing volume as the afternoon progressed; many stop-loss orders hit; leaders including Radio, US Steel, GE, and Westinghouse broke sharply. “Selling took on a panicky character” in the final hour; “pandemonium reigned around the posts at which active stocks were traded”; 2.6M shares were traded in the final 50 minutes, or about 40% of the total day’s volume of 6.4M; the tape ran almost 2 hours behind and price breaks were exceptionally wide.
Prof. I. Fisher of Yale Univ. defends stock market rise of 100% since 1923, says based on increasing prosperity due to many factors, including more stable money, new scientific management, new inventions, Prohibition [Note: huh???]; believes public speculative mania is least important factor in the rise. Concludes by criticizing capital gains tax.
Bond market has been rallying as stocks decline recently.
Some commodity prices: Wheat over $1.25, corn over $0.90, cotton 19 cents, copper 18 cents.
Rail freight loadings for the week ended Oct. 12 were down 11,121, or about 1%, from 1928, vs. 7,985 decline prev. week.
Steel trade reviews report decline in production appears to have hit bottom, with all departments except automotive active.
Senate refuses to classify avocado as pear for tariff purposes.
Somewhat later in history, another important event occurred–the election of Franklin D Roosevelt as US President, and the beginning of the New Deal policies in 1933. I was reminded of this by a quote on program outline for the Green New Deal conference that I attended yesterday. Normally we only see the “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself” quote, but that program excerpted a rather more relevant observation of Roosevelt’s on what had caused the Great Depression:
Yet our distress comes from no failure of substance. We are stricken by no plague of locusts. Compared with the perils which our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we have still much to be thankful for. Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply. Primarily this is because the rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.
True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish.
The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.
It’s a great speech, and I recommend reading it in its entirety. We’re also very fortunate to have ready access these days to original documents like this via the Internet.






October 26th, 2009 at 11:27 am
While it is great to have access to this information, keep some points in mind:
How many times have various “economic experts” labeled Roosevelt as a “socialist”? He started this stuff. And now Obama (another “socialst”) is still doing it. THEY’RE responsible for the mess we’re in.
What does much of the business MSM say? These Wall Street CEO’s destroying their firms is “bad judgement.” And that’s not illegal. They deserve to be bailed out. Because if we don’t do it, then the whole system collapses.
Absolutely no accountability.
Does Obama have one economic advisor without connections to Goldman Sachs? No he doesn’t. And, this has been analyzed to death. But the bottom is line is he’s just another politician. All that matters is winning the next election and spin.
He’s literally done none of the “changes” that he campainged on. So how come millions aren’t holding him accountable? Because so many are so desperate to have literally anybody but the previous guy that it doesn’t matter. They all say the same thing. Give him time, he’ll come thru.
Hang on a minute. In the real world many of us have a 90-day “probationary period” on a new job. The President isn’t allowed that.
What does that say about leadership when appearance seems to be THE ONLY thing that counts?
Health care is one of the biggest factors killing the economy (and the population). Michelle Obama has a new You Tube clip on the White House site. She’s basically saying, I’m concerned. We see still more cuts of people who’ve been screwed over by health care “providers.”
What we don’t see are the secret deals that her husband’s making with drug and insurance firms to gurantee their billions in profits. If he really wants to bring about “real change”, he would have the guts to stand up to these firms. Which means he’d be a one-term President. Then he’d retire, be set for life. And still enjoy govt. universal health care as a private citizen.
But we all know he won’t do that. Instead, it’s spin this to make the Other Side look bad. Which again means there is no change. And there’s not going to be any change.
How come millions of people refuse to see that? In the U.K., lately I’ve been hearing various rich people having a go at those “socialists.” I have the right to make as much money as I can. And then to decide how it’s to be used. If I choose to have a yacht and a home in the South of France, it’s none of your damn business.
Right. So if sharing the wealth is such an evil “socialist” idea, then why are you in the NHS?
The public works longer hours for less pay. They get made redundant, homeless and maybe worse. Some CEO says I care. And to show that I care I’m going to take a $1 salary. What he doesn’t tell you is that he’s worth millions, has very nice stock options. And a severance agreement guranteeing even more millions. And of course since there’s literally no else in the world who can do this incredibly complex job, he’s entitled to all of it.
Even if he’s responsible for destroying his firm. Because “bad judgement” isn’t illegal.
Obama’s for hearing all points of view. The MSM loves to hype the right-wing ntucases protesting for even more expensive pointless “health care.” Yet, if progressives protest for single payer, they’re arrested, tasered and hauled away. When was the last time you heard about a neocon who’s in a govt. “potential terrorist” database? Does Cindy Sheehan have Al-Quaeda connections? Not that I know of.
FYI: Obama recently declared a “national emergency” (due to the H1N1 flu). Legally, if he chooses to, he can declare martial law. It’s right there in current U.S. law. Yet NOBODY will touch this. If the worst happens and he does, everything comes out of the White House. The rest of the govt. doesn’t exist. The MSM is under govt. control.
If that did happen, would anybody react? Right now I seriously don’t know.
October 26th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I’m posting this Four Bad Bear Markets graph again just in case new readers haven’t seen it before. The big question is, when will it start its second dip/plummet/crash?
http://dshort.com/charts/bears/four-bears-large.gif
October 26th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Steve, the New Deal was about setting up new credit facilities a new way to create more debt. Never forget FDR was governor of NY, which likely means he was put in power by the money changers. His New Deal was nothing more than declaring an emergency by amending Section 5B of the Act of October 6, 1917, otherwise known as the Trading with the Enemy Act and using it to restore some kind of faith in banking, seize gold, install deposit insurance and set the stage for the next expansion of debt. It is not going to be easy to figure out who takes a haircut in this matter, but I suspect it will be everyone whether we like it or not. Point being FDR spoke with forked tongue when he spoke the truth.
In short though, I don’t believe we should get too bogged down in philosophy as long as we can come to the conclusion that we are going to continue to operate as a free society after this mess is cleared up. This is because we are at this time faced with a crisis that could very well end modern society as we know it and lead to collapse of systems that make modern society possible. As much as I don’t like what the Fed did last year, I do know that it is very possible that every bank in the world could have bellied up and the world faced systematic failure. Never again should the capacity to multiply ones stack of money using financial slight of hand to produce an inflation ever be allowed again. As we ponder these ideas, the mistake of the recent past is being repeated all over again by firms such as Goldman Sachs and large banks around the world, as if the crisis just fell out of the sky and what they were doing had nothing to do with it. I feel sometimes as if these people should be thrown into the streets, shot and burned on the spot as vermin.
October 26th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Peter Si, how relevant is the stock market to the real economy nowadays?
October 26th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Let me rephrase the question, how much can DOW and S&P500 reflect the state of health in the US economy or the $US, in 1929 and 2009?
October 26th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Steve,
Last week you noted an upcoming article about an investigation into lending standards and printed in the Sunday Telegraph.
The article has been summarised and posted on news.com.au
http://www.news.com.au/business/money/story/0,28323,26254702-5013951,00.html
October 26th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
“In short though, I don’t believe we should get too bogged down in philosophy as long as we can come to the conclusion that we are going to continue to operate as a free society after this mess is cleared up. This is because we are at this time faced with a crisis that could very well end modern society as we know it and lead to collapse of systems that make modern society possible.”
We have to choose between personal freedom and absolute property rights I believe. We cannot have both because the main symptom of the current mess is an excessive debt which cannot and will never be repaid.
Getting rid of the debt clearly requires violating property rights of the creditors and establishing control of the institutions which pushed the debt.
Forcing the debtors to repay (in Australia and Europe – recourse loans) will require violating freedom of the debtors by pushing them into servitude.
Not fixing the mess will result in losing the competition with the Asian / possibly Latin American countries over the next few decades.
Other models of modern society do exist but they are built around limited personal freedom and limited property rights.
So let’s save at least our personal freedom.
I don’t believe there are any other options left.
October 26th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
This is what we should do – impose a tax on capital inflow to stop the AUD going over the roof:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/foreign-speculation-on-our-currency-is-a-bubble-set-to-burst-20091025-heo5.html
“Why funnel the money gouged out of American and British taxpayers into lending to their national economies to maintain employment when there are richer pickings elsewhere? Two of those destinations are Brazil and Australia. Their resource-rich economies are still doing well compared with most other countries because they are riding in the slipstream of the strong demand for commodities from China and India.
Cash is pouring into these economies, not for development, but to speculate on the local currency and the sharemarket. The rising value of the Brazilian real and the Australian dollar against the US dollar has had a disastrous impact on both countries’ non-commodity export and import competing industries. Brazil’s popular and largely economically successful left-wing Government led by President Lula da Silva is meeting the problem head on. It has decided to impose a 2 per cent tax on all capital inflows to stop the real appreciating further.”
The whole article is spot-on I think.
October 26th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
“Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. ”
We were told some 40 years ago that Australia had a 50-year supply of copper.
In 1933, The US and the world was at the dawn of the oil era. Global oil production reached its peak in the first half 2008. Australia oil production peaked in year 2000.
October 26th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
ak, The rate hike is the icing on the cake for the dollar carry trade. Expect more cash coming in and $A going up in anticipation of more rate rises.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Hello Laurence,
I guess I lurk here for a reason (and will now lurk even more), and that is because I only have a very basic understanding of economics. I know that houses can only go up while people can afford to take on other people’s debt.
I guess I appreciated the link when I first saw it as it gave me a very basic perspective of just how much the market tanked in the Great Depression and thus I thought that other people might therefore also like it. But, I guess I was wrong
October 26th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Very interesting post. Yesterday in Melbourne media there were many headlines reporting the rise of median Melbourne home prices to around $480,000, an increase of approximately $20,000 on the previous quarter. It seems that we are locked in the roaring twenties rather than the deflationary thirties.
With the destruction of so much US bank capital, further shocks to the system coming from an approaching peak in Alt A resets, as well as the souring commercial property loans, I’m surprised that Australia’s housing boom has temporarily been reinvigorated.
But I wonder about one possible scenario: Given their low savings rate, the destruction of so much capital and the high current debt levels, is it plausible that interest rates will spike sharply if the US cannot fund its deficit. A Bloomberg release last week stated that new dollar purchases by foreign central banks was down by 2/3rds. The other purchases were mainly in Yen and Euros. This is a reversal of the status quo at start of the millennium where 2/3rds of central bank purchases were in dollars.
No doubt the Obama administration has China slotted in for a fair swag of their deficit but I would hate to think what will happen if the Chinese do a no show. Will China continue to hollow out the US by pegging the Renminbi against the dollar and fund their consumption by purchasing treasuries? Perhaps! Who knows how long China can continue to ride to the rescue. But Julian Robertson one of the fathers of the hedge fund industry and founder of the of Tiger fund recently said that if the US could not fund its deficit it faced Financial “Armageddon” and he saw interest rates rising rapidly. Interestingly he was investing in some derivative that paid the difference between treasuries and market interest rates. If that scenario pans out and interest rates in the US rise to say ten percent, then as a capital importing country things will get ugly here too. Maybe then we’ll start to see our “black days”.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Peter, I was too lazy to think before I asked that question. Nothing wrong with your graphs, I was only looking for something extra and I thought you had the details handy. In the aftermath of the 1929 crash, the DOW eventually lost 90% of its value at its peak. The $US was backed by gold then, so you think the value of DOW had some meaning. Now the $US is digitally produced, does the net worth of DOW in dollar term has any real meaning? I don’t really know, so I thought I would ask an expert.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
As I see things, laissez-faire capitalism has an inherent tendency to self destruct.
For a while, with the rise of Kensianism -started with the New Deal in the US and other similar programmes in Europe- it appeared that laissez-faire capitalism had evolved to a more stable stage.
But just as a human immune system rejects and destroys the kidney that keeps it alive, capitalism subverted, perverted, rejected and attacked Government intervention.
Here are two quotations that condense the spirit of the times:
“(…) The rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.
True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish.”
(From FDR’s inaugural speech in 1933).
And:
“The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms -greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge- has marked the upward surge of mankind, and greed -you mark my words- will not only save Teldar Paper but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you”.
(From Wall Street, the 1987 Oliver Stone film).
How much have we forgotten in 50 years. And once society is rotten to the core, and human beings are now human resources, and there are those who are richer, just because they were rich to begin with (just as there are people who are famous, just for being famous), and even the planet where we live is sick, what quotation can I offer? What about this:
“Eddie Barzoon… take a good look, because he’s the poster child for the next millennium. These people, it’s no mystery where they come from. You sharpen the human appetite to the point where it can split atoms with its desire. You build egos the size of cathedrals. Fiber-optically connect the world to every eager impulse. Grease even the dullest dreams with these dollar-green gold-plated fantasies until every human becomes an aspiring emperor, becomes his own god. Where can you go from there? As we’re scrambling from one deal to the next, who’s got his eye on the planet? As the air thickens, the water sours, even bees’ honey takes on the metallic taste of radioactivity… and it just keeps coming, faster and faster. There’s no chance to think, to prepare; it’s buy futures, sell futures… when there is no future. We got a runaway train, boy. We got a billion Eddie Barzoons all jogging into the future. Every one of them is getting ready to fistf***k God’s ex-planet, lick their fingers clean, as they reach out toward their pristine, cybernetic keyboards to tote up their f****g billable hours. And then it hits home. You got to pay your own way, Eddie. It’s a little late in the game to buy out now”.
(From The Devil’s Advocate, the 1997 Taylor Hackford film).
October 26th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
I came across a news item yesterday on the housing market in Chairman Mao’s home town of Changsha. The local NCNA reported that the Changsha municipal bureau of Statistics revealed that “foreigners” had purchased 53.32% of residential properties on sale during the first 9 months of this year.
In Sydney, every time I touch on the subject, people would tell me how the Chinese have been buying up houses.
I think this is only a short squeeze caused by funds made available from the earlier liquidation of industrial investments. The more properties they buy now, the more will be on the market in the foreseeable future looking for exit.
That may coincide with the outgoing dollar carry trade investments. Shall we see real deflation in the property market?
October 26th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Apologies if this has already been posted. Many of us have talked about commercial real estate crashing. Nice timeing!
Capmark Files for Bankruptcy Protection
Capmark Financial Group Inc., one of the nation’s largest commercial-real-estate lenders, filed for bankruptcy protection in Delaware.
The much-expected move underscores the deep problems in the business-property market. After suffering from the collapse in residential mortgages, U.S. banks face steep losses from commercial real-estate loans. Capmark has originated more than $10 billion in commercial real-estate loans, according to Moody’s Investors Service.
It also represents a blow to the company’s private-equity owners. In 2006, a group led by KKR & Co., Goldman Sachs Capital Partners and Five Mile Capital Partners acquired the lender GMAC LLC’s commercial-real estate business and renamed it Capmark. As of March 31, the investor group owned about 75% of the company, with GMAC and its employees owning the balance.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125640081248705947.html?mod=rss_Today%2527s_Most_Popular
October 26th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
“…laissez-faire capitalism has an inherent tendency to self destruct.”
Very true. Enter the utility of classical and neoclassical economic theory. With its corrosive monopoly on teaching and policy, it has deluded and propagandized the public into thinking that it has a tendency to be either in equilibrium or tending towards equilibrium. Other nonsense doctrines enter into the public conscience, assumptions (‘ludicrously fabricated fictions’) such as cost internalization, perfect competition, tragedy of the commons, rational agents, etc.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
“But just as a human immune system rejects and destroys the kidney that keeps it alive, capitalism subverted, perverted, rejected and attacked Government intervention.”
Not so in many cases. What we have is what Adam Smith and other economists of his time denounced as mercantilism – hording of gold as a way to supposedly enrich the state. This time, it is corporate mercantilism – state protection and subsidy of the largest capitalist firms while increasingly enacting free market policies for the middle/working class.
This is the direction that policies since the 1980s have taken. Intellectual property rights comes to mind.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:30 am
@ak: “This is what we should do – impose a tax on capital inflow to stop the AUD going over the roof:”
I agree. Brazil has already done it. If nations with appreciating currencies take this route it opens up the way for other economies suffering at zirp and remaining under deflationary pressure to go the sweden route and start charging a small penalty on excess reserves. That should get things moving again without resulting in capital flight to AUD, brz real etc.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:44 am
So Philip, do you define laissez-faire capitalism with mercantilism? You can’t have it both ways.
The truth of the matter is that we have had nothing like laissez-faire, at least since the Progressive Era, and this has culminated in the current mess. Nonetheless, terms matter, and to blame capitalism lets the interventionists off the hook. Mercantism, neo-mercantilism, and corporatism are much closer to the mark in describing the reigning paradigms. Laissez Faire did not create a fiat money (or define money as something other than a commodity), centrally-managed banking and financial sectors, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, union protections, and the like.
Incidentally, I very much liked the FDR quote, except for the last point regarding pursuing monetary profit. This is not the problem, in and of itself. The question is whether or not our institutions allow this pursuit to take place in ways that maximize the social good. Rent-seeking perverts this goal, and today we see what happens when it is taken to an extreme.
October 27th, 2009 at 4:57 am
Video – Fall of the Republic – worth watching
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU&feature=player_embedded
Dinninger has this in Tinfoil but many here will find it close to the truth
http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=115736&findnew#new
October 27th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Brazil’s tax on capital inflow is one of the silliest ideas I have ever heard from them. Why would you want to prop up the US dollar, it’s not Brazil’s problem that the US economy is a basket case.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Ernie,
Is this idea (capital inflow tax) silly for the Americans (the Brazilians don’t care) or for them?
If the idea of throttling carry trade and speculation on domestic currency (real) is bad for the Brazilians – please explain what’s wrong with it.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:39 am
westlch,
No, I am not conflating laissez-faire capitalism with mercantilism.
On the ideal of laissez-faire capitalism, it is unreachable in the presence of the state. No economy has every approached this ideal, for two primary reasons: the rich (owners of concentrated private property) have always required a powerful, interventionist and quite often violent state to protect and subsidize them.
The other problem is that in the real world, markets function very differently as to what is asserted in the economic literature. The pseudo-science that forms the basis of micro- and macro-economic theory that asserts that markets are actually efficient.
On the other hand, some constructive intervention is quite often needed to bail out capitalism of its inherent self-destructive tendencies. As Ralph Nader has remarked, the only reason why capitalism is still around is because the state is always there to bail it out.
Rather than the myth of laissez-faire, we have always been subjected to some form of mercantilism throughout history. Back in the time of Adam Smith, it was state mercantilism. These days, it is corporate mercantilism.
“Nonetheless, terms matter, and to blame capitalism lets the interventionists off the hook.”
Capitalism is one enormous system of state intervention. The two primary institutions of capitalism, namely private property and wage labor, required systematic state violence and coercion throughout the centuries to enlarge and sustain them.
Yes, terms do matter, and to pretend that what is occurring is the fault of interventionists as opposed to ‘good’ capitalists who accept market principles (who does this?) is disingenuous. Quite often, but not always, they are one and the same.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:56 am
mannfm11,
” I feel sometimes as if these people should be thrown into the streets, shot and burned on the spot as vermin.”
And, not to put too fine a point on it, so should all those who enabled the Bankster parasites (around the world).
Let’s not forget- ever- that it was Govt’s, regulators and CB’s that fully supported and indeed enabled the parasite Banksters with provision of the legal and regulatory structures for this abomination in derivatives trade to thrive. The enablers revelled and preened in the glow of their mythical economic “growth”. What is so galling now is that nothing has changed , save taxpayers and future generations being dumped on to the tune of $Trillions in debt. We have the bill, but our future has been plundered to pay it. And as we can see, the party goes on as speculation off the back of taxpayer funded free money is still rife with Banksters worldwide celebrating their obscene bonuses and bogus profits (thanks to don’t ask,dont tell accounting rules).Eventually, these same political whores will come to us begging again for our vote so they can keep their snout at the trough. A fine foundation for economic recovery.If we think we can see improved Governance as a result of the GFC, think again. Here is a commentary from a 30 year veteran of Australian political reporting;
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2724788.htm
And most populations ,dumbed down by Govt propaganda and anaesthetised with Govt handouts, are happy and thankful just to live another day while the Big Game goes on behind the curtain. At our expense of course, as our future wealth is borrowed then spent in the here and now propping up dead horses. I read the newsfrom1930 every day. I am sometimes dumbstruck with the acute similarities of the times, comments and policies. Very foreboding reading.
Are we now seeing the beginning of the catastrophic “C” wave down in the markets?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_TwUS3GyHKsQ/SuYU7mFbvPI/AAAAAAAACUo/OdhKh-0w8N8/s1600-h/30spx.png
Courtesy of Daneric (who I know EW just admires SO much!)
http://danericselliottwaves.blogspot.com/
October 27th, 2009 at 11:16 am
GSM
I saw Alan Ramsey interview; puts into perspective the type of fools we have running the joint. Rudd, Howard almost all of them are from the same mould – slimy show ponies
October 27th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Aac,
Yes it was an enlightening interview.Ramsey seemed so relieved that he could now finally speak his mind without the dreaded axe hanging over his head of being denied the precious “access”, that is used to control all media.
It was a good interview to put Chartalist’s theories where they belong – in fantasyland. It showed that Govt is anything but benign and benevolent.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:58 am
ak,
Brazil’s tax on capital inflow is simply to devalue their currency, nothing specific to the carry trade. It’s just another method of propping up the $US, and not letting the markets work.
Several other countries are trying to prop up the $US by various methods, eg. like the Asian central banks did earlier this month. The US needs a weak dollar to help it restart exports.
October 27th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Ernie,
Why do you think that “letting the markets work” would help Brazil?
The Brazilians don’t care about the US. I don’t care about the US either – I have never lived there and have no family.
To me “letting the markets work” is just blind faith in discredited economic theories.
Brazil interest rate stands at 8.75%
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/Economics/Interest-Rate.aspx?symbol=BRL
I think that you are wrong regarding the carry trade potential. It has not been realised only because of the Brazilian government policy.
http://www.investorsinsight.com/blogs/dailypfennig/archive/2009/09/28/a-new-carry-trade-currency.aspx
“But, let’s talk about that for a minute… If the dollar begins to become the new funding currency of the Carry Trade, that means that people will be selling the dollar short, and using the proceeds to buy a higher yielding asset… Well, in today’s markets, there aren’t what we would traditionally consider to be “high yielding assets”… For the Carry Trade is quite risky, therefore you need to have some cushion from the “buy side” asset… The only “real interest differential” in the world resides with Brazil… But the real is traded on a non-deliverable forward, which means it’s just as liquid as say Aussie or kiwi, which were the main beneficiaries when the yen was the funding currency.
So… This new Carry Trade, might have to wait a bit before getting into 4th gear. When the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) begins their rate hike cycle, probably by year-end, then it might begin to make sense… Which is just another thing in the gauntlet the dollar has to run through every day! “
October 27th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
ak,
I agree with you that the carry trade happens, but I would imagine Brazil would be more concerned about it’s export trade denominated in $US. If the $US is weak, then Brazilian exports will seem expensive in many countries who have chosen to devalue their currencies inline with the $US, the real issue is the use of $US for foreign trade. If you look at a chart of the $AUD vs the Brazilian Real eg: http://au.finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?amt=1&from=AUD&to=BRL&submit=Convert then it’s been pretty flat compared to us for the last 6mths. All that time, the $US has been going down.
I thought they were on the right track doing a currency swap with China earlier on this year, to bypass the $US.
Now Brazil have chosen to introduce a 2% distortion. Does the world really need little Smoot–Hawley’s popping up everywhere?
October 27th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Philip,
Most scholars do not consider Ralph Nader to be an authority on capitalism, much less economics. As someone with some experience teaching comparative economic systems to undergrads, I can assure you that your calling capitalism “one enormous system of state intervention” is rather novel. But I do believe we find much with which to agree in what caused the current economic crisis. It is something that developed, over a long period of time, as powerful corporate interests used the state to promote its interests. Wall Street created the Fed, and today it controls it and the Treasury, while military contractors exert just as much influence over the DoD and firms like ADM dictate the ag policies coming out of the USDA. What frustrates is that the state shields these entities from market correction–surely we’d be in a better place today if Citibank, Goldman, et al. were forced to internalize their losses, just as the economy would have been worse off if Enron was successful in getting the protection it sought back in 2001.
I assume we agree on this line of reasoning, but not on whether these activities are correctly called capitalism. They should be categorized as mercantilism (like you said), or corporatism, or state capitalism, or socialism. To repeat, terms matter, and to blame capitalism is to let the interventionists off the hook. And if that happens, well, they will be more likely to continue to do damage in the future.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
“If the $US is weak, then Brazilian exports will seem expensive in many countries who have chosen to devalue their currencies inline with the $US, the real issue is the use of $US for foreign trade.”
So you are saying that BRL/USD * USD/AUD is not equal to BRL/AUD ?
“Now Brazil have chosen to introduce a 2% distortion.”
A distortion to what? Being a sink to US dollars printed to plug the hole?