FedUpUSA

Archive for the ‘Banks’ Category

The people out there that believe that the U.S. economy is experiencing a permanent recovery and that very bright days are ahead for us should have their heads examined.  Unfortunately, what we are going through right now is simply just a period of “hopetimism” between two financial crashes.  Things may seem relatively stable right now, but it won’t last long.  The truth is that the financial crisis of 2008 was just a warm up act for the economic horror show that is coming.  Nothing really got fixed after the crash of 2008.  We are living in the biggest debt bubble in the history of the world, and it has gotten even bigger since then.  The “too big to fail” banks are larger now than they have ever been.  Americans continue to run up credit card balances like there is no tomorrow.  Tens of thousands of manufacturing facilities and millions of jobs continue to leave the country.  We continue to consume far more than we produce and we continue to become poorer as a nation.  None of the problems that caused the crisis of 2008 have been solved and we are even weaker financially than we were back then.  So why in the world are so many people so optimistic about the economy right now?

Just take a look at the chart posted below.  It shows the growth of total debt in the United States.  During the financial crisis of 2008 there was a little “hiccup”, but the truth is that not much deleveraging really took place at all.  And since the recession “ended”, total credit market debt has gone on to even greater heights….

So what does this mean for the future?

Well, if a small “hiccup” in the debt bubble caused so much chaos back in 2008, what is going to happen when this debt bubble finally bursts?

That is something to think about.

Sadly, most Americans seem oblivious to all of this.

If you go out to malls in the wealthy areas of America today, people are charging up a storm.  In all, Americans charged a whopping 2.5 trillion dollars on their credit cards during 2011.  Way too many people have already forgotten the lessons that we all learned back in 2008.

Of course some Americans pay off their credit cards every month, but way too many Americans are not doing that.  Today, Americans are carrying 793 billion dollars in revolving credit balances.

And student loan debt is an even bigger bubble than credit card debt is.  As I have written about previously, total student loan debt in America is rapidly approaching a trillion dollars.

So it looks like U.S. consumers have not learned to stay away from debt.

That is not good.

Well, what about the banks?

Has the financial system learned any lessons since 2008?

No, not really.

Sadly, the “too big to fail” banks are now even bigger than ever.  The total assets of the six largest U.S. banks increased by 39 percent between September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2011.  If they were to fail today, they would be even more of a threat to our financial system than they were back in 2008.

And our major banks continue to be very highly leveraged.  In fact, major banks all over the world are absolutely swamped with debt.

The following statistics come from Zero Hedge….

The U.S. banking system is leveraged 13 to 1.

The Japanese banking system is leveraged 23 to 1.

The French banking system is leveraged 26 to 1.

The German banking system is leveraged 32 to 1.

These are insane levels of leverage, and they are just inviting another major financial crisis.

Do you all remember Lehman Brothers?  The fact that they were leveraged so highly is what did them in back in 2008.  When the value of their holdings declined by just a little bit they were totally wiped out.

Well, during this next financial crisis large financial institutions are going to be wiped out all over the world.  Major banks all over the globe are going to be crying out for more bailouts when things take a turn against them.

They are making the exact same mistakes that they made before, and they are going to be expecting more government handouts when things go bad.

Will we ever learn?

So obviously the banking system has not learned any lessons.

What about the federal government?

Well, if you follow my blog regularly, you know that I love to write about how horrific U.S. government debt is.

Unfortunately, over the past four years things have gotten so much worse.

Back in 2008, the U.S. national debt crossed the 10 trillion dollar mark.

Just recently, it crossed the 15 trillion dollar mark.

So now we are in a much weaker position financially to respond to another major financial crisis.

Just check out the chart posted below.  This is a recipe for national financial suicide….

During fiscal 2011, the Obama administration stole close to 150 million dollars from our children and our grandchildren every single hour.

At the moment, the legacy of debt that we are passing on to future generations is sitting a grand total of $15,351,406,294,640.49.

But keep in mind that it is going up every single hour.

Meanwhile, our ability to service that debt is declining.  We are rapidly getting poorer as a nation.

During 2011, the amount of money that left the United States exceeded the amount of money that entered the United States by more than a half a trillion dollars.

This gap is called a trade deficit, and it is absolutely ripping our economy to shreds.

For a moment, imagine Uncle Sam standing next to a giant pile of money on a map of the United States.  Then imagine a half a trillion dollars being taken out of that pile every single year.

So why haven’t we totally run out of money yet?

Well, it is because we borrow those dollars back.  In order to maintain our false standard of living, our federal government, our state governments and our local governments have to go out and beg the rest of the world to lend us our dollars back.

Sadly, our government schools have “dumbed-down” the population so much that most of them don’t even know what a “trade deficit” is anymore.

Meanwhile, our economic infrastructure is being gutted like a fish.

Look, I know that I go over this point over and over and over, but it is absolutely imperative that we all understand this.

The half a trillion dollars a year that leaves this country every year could have gone to support businesses and jobs inside the United States.

But instead it is going to support businesses and jobs on the other side of the world.

The consequences of this are absolutely devastating.

According to U.S. Representative Betty Sutton, an average of 23 manufacturing facilities a day closed down in the United States during 2010.  Overall, more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have shut down since 2001.

Even many so-called “American companies” have been bought up by the rest of the world.  The following comes from a recent article posted on Economy In Crisis….

RCA is now a French company, Zenith is a Korean company. Frigidaire is a Swedish company. IBM’s Personal Computer Division—with its 500 patents—is now a Chinese company. Westinghouse Nuclear Energy’s major shareholder is Toshiba—a Japanese Company. Lucent Technologies, a former research division of AT&T, along with all the patents acquired from the beginning of the phone system, is now a French company. In 2008, Brazilian-Belgian brewing company InBev purchased the iconic American brewer Anheuser-Busch, makers of Budweiser. With the sale of these manufacturing companies, the future profit and technologies all belong to foreign entities.

We once had the greatest economic machine in the history of the world.

Now it is being dismantled and bought up by foreigners.

When America’s economic infrastructure declines, that means that there are less jobs available for all of us.

As I wrote about the other day, the employment situation in this country is not getting better and we have never even come close to recovering from the recession that started back in 2008.

During 2008 and 2009, the U.S. economy lost millions of jobs.  Since the beginning of 2010, the percentage of the U.S. population that has had a job has remained very stable….

Normally, when a recession ends the percentage of Americans that have a job bounces back pretty dramatically.

So considering the fact that the employment situation has never recovered from the last financial crisis, what is going to happen when the next financial crisis hits?

And most of the jobs that have been “created” during this so-called “recovery” have been low income jobs.  In fact, if you look closely at the employment numbers that were released last Friday, you will find that the vast majority of the “new jobs” were part-time jobs.

But you cannot pay a mortgage and support a family on a part-time job.

Sadly, the truth is that median household income in America has been steadily dropping over the past several years.  Tens of millions of American families are deeply struggling and more Americans than ever are falling into poverty.

Back in the year 2000, about one out of every nine Americans was living in poverty.  Today, about one out of every seven Americans is living in poverty.

All of this is causing a great deal of anxiety in America today.  Large numbers of Americans know that something has fundamentally changed, even if they don’t understand the specifics.  That is one reason why sites such as this one have become so popular.  People want some answers.

And once people get some answers about what is really happening, they tend to want to prepare for the hard times that are coming.

In a few days, a new series on National Geographic entitled “Doomsday Preppers” premieres.  The mainstream media is starting to take notice of the growing “prepper” movement in America today.  It is estimated that there are at least 2 million “preppers” in the United States at this point.  Of course people are “prepping” for a whole host of reasons, but the number one concern among most groups of preppers is the economy.

As the economy crumbles, more Americans than ever have decided that it is not a good thing to be 100% dependent on the system.

Back in 2008 and 2009, millions of Americans suddenly lost their jobs.  Because they did not have any finances stored up, large numbers of them also lost their homes.  Many went from being solidly middle class to being out on the street in a matter of months.

That doesn’t have to happen to you.  Instead of blowing your money on frivolous things, do what you can to set something aside for the difficult times that are on the horizon.

A lot of those “in the know” are quietly making their own preparations.  For example, legendary film director James Cameron (Avatar, Titanic and Terminator) has purchased more than 2600 acres of farmland in New Zealand and he is getting out of the U.S. for good apparently.

Unfortunately, most of us do not have the resources for something like that.  But what most of us can do is we can change our priorities and start focusing on the things that will help us survive the hard times that are coming.

So are you ready?

The Economic Collapse

This is an interesting op-ed in the morning edition of the WSJ:

We’re now in the 37th month of central government manipulation of the free-market system through the Federal Reserve’s near-zero interest rate policy. Is it working?

Business and consumer loan demand remains modest in part because there’s no hurry to borrow at today’s super-low rates when the Fed says rates will stay low for years to come. Why take the risk of borrowing today when low-cost money will be there tomorrow?

Why borrow at all, in the main?  Borrowing is the taking of leverage — “gearing.”  It magnifies both gains and losses, and it is the losses that turn into trouble, as often they wind up being borne by someone other than the borrower.

They’re supposed to be borne by the borrower and lender, incidentally.  But the lender rarely actually eats them, especially when things get “really bad” — then the taxpayer gets soaked, directly or indirectly, as we have seen.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told lawmakers last week that fiscal policy should first “do no harm.” The same can be said of monetary policy. The Fed’s prolonged, “emergency” near-zero interest rate policy is now harming our economy.

It always was Charles.

The Fed policy has resulted in a huge infusion of capital into the system, creating a massive rise in liquidity but negligible movement of that money. It is sitting there, in banks all across America, unused.

No.  Capital and borrowing are not the same thing.  They spend the same, but they’re not the same.  Capital is economic surplus — that which you have after you earn and pay the necessities of life (or to run your business.)  Borrowing is leverage — “mechanical advantage” if you will, but it is always a negative-sum game as not only does it have to be paid back but the interest expense means you must earn even more to pay it with.

The multiplier effect that normally comes with a boost in liquidity remains at rock bottom. Sufficient capital is in the system to spur growth—it simply isn’t being put to work fast enough.

The paradox of debt is that due to the negative sum nature of it there is always less of a multiplier than the liquidity increase would suggest.  That is, mathematically it is a negative game for the borrower in every case.  This does not mean that a borrower cannot turn that disadvantage into advantage, but it does mean that the odds are against him or her in doing so.

The poker player in Vegas is at a similar disadvantage due to the house “rake.”  If six similarly-skilled players sit at a poker table in Vegas and play long enough they will all wind up broke, because the house rake will consume all their money.  It is a certainty if the game goes on for long enough, the skills are evenly-enough matched, and their luck is reasonably even.

The only way for such a player to win is to be better than the other people at the table by a sufficient amount to overcome the house rake.  He must also stop playing when he has amassed enough winnings and depart.  This means that for the player of superior skill he is incented to play at a higher level of wager, becasue he wants the fewest number of hands dealt to make his money to keep the rake’s “rape” of his stack to a reasonable level.

We’ve also seen a destructive run of capital out of Europe and into safe U.S. assets such as Treasury bonds, reflecting a world-wide aversion to risk. New business formation is at record lows, according to Census Bureau data. There is still insufficient confidence among business people and consumers to spark an investment and growth boom.

Business formation comes from capital formation which is the product of economic surplus.  That’s all.  Since capital formation is born of savings, that is, economic surplus, zero interest rates destroy the incentive to do so.  Low interest rates tend to cause people to borrow for uneconomic purpose, just as inflation provides incentive to buy things that aren’t really needed right now “because they’ll go up in price tomorrow.”  This is all malinvestment of one form or another and it’s destructive to the health of the economy.

Just look at SYSCO, which reported results this morning.  They showed that food inflation was 6.8% over the last year, contrary to the government lie that “inflation is non-existent.”  Uh huh.

What Mr. Schwab is missing here is that The Fed is hardly an “independent” central bank.  It is in fact beholden to Congress, which has pumped up $5 trillion in debt over the last three years.  That debt has a servicing cost, and it is the “ultra low” interest rates that make this temporarily affordable.

How is Congress going to service this debt when the rate of interest rises?  More to the point, where are the adults in the room in Washington DC?  We’ve had this on both sides of the aisle — “we must stimulate the economy!” — with borrowed money.

Outright bribery of the electorate both hasn’t and can’t work to lead to a durable recovery.  Instead, it has backed Bernanke and Congress into a corner.  When rates rise to just a blended 4% Congress will be facing a $600 billion annual interest bill.  From where will the money come?

This is the trap into which Japan fell and what we are facing today.  It is an extraordinarily destructive cycle that is very, very difficult to break, because it requires pulling the liquidity support at the same time Congress dramatically raises taxes, cuts spending (real cuts, not the imaginary cuts from “baseline” budgeting) or both.  In short it requires admitting that we took fiscal heroin to avoid pain and accepting the accumulated damage for a period of time, accepting the “deferred depression” that we all tried to hide.

Charles Schwab leaves this unsaid, of course, but then again he’s running a brokerage.  Were people to think this thing through they’d realize that the mathematical conundrum presented by Schwab has no resolution that doesn’t ultimately result in that contraction asserting itself.  There is always the matter of timing, but not outcome — that which is fueled by nothing other than fiscal methamphetamine either leads to a nasty crash when you stop taking or heart failure.  Pick one — both suck but while one is nasty the other is fatal.

Oh no, it’s just Greece, right?  Uh, wrong.

BUDAPEST (Reuters) – Hungary is seeking an international credit line of 15 to 20 billion ($20 to $26.3 billion) euros, the secretary of state heading the prime minister’s office, Mihaly Varga, was quoted on Saturday as saying.

Hungary is seeking backup from the International Monetary Fund and the European Union to reassure investors it has financing even if it gets cut off from debt markets later this year.

Uh huh.  Remember that Hungary has been having some wee problems of late with regard to its government, the EU and IMF.

Hungarian bond yields are over 11%, which is not good at all in a world of ZIRP.  This effectively precludes most borrowing.

The problem with these pleas and “rescues” is that they continue to belie the real problem, which is that governments cannot continually borrow more than they tax.  It is simply not possible on a long-term basis for this to work, as compounding eventually gets you.  It might not immediately, but in the longer run it will with certainty.

Do I expect Hungary to eschew that which it must?  Not right away, and perhaps not at all until there’s a disaster, but in the end all governments must reconcile their budgets to this underlying fact — like it or not.

A default by any other name is still a default. When Greece defaults, the  inter-connected chains of credit default swaps will fall like dominoes.

For your Superbowl half-time reading, here is a brief summary of the situation in Europe:

1. Greece is poised to default, the end-game everyone anticipated in 2011. It is not a matter of if but when.

2. That default will trigger credit-default swap contracts, derivatives known as CDS that protect the owner from events such as default.

3. This will implode the shadow-banking system and the visible banking system, as those who sold the CDS (financial institutions) do not have enough cash or assets to pay the owners of the CDS.

4. The general idea is that sovereign default is very unlikely, so you can sell protection (CDS) against that possibility for a low premium, and cover that bet by buying your own protection from another player.

5. If that player (counterparty) can’t pay you off, then you can’t meet your obligations on the CDS you originated and sold.

6. So the failure of one counterparty can trigger a systemic failure akin to a row of dominoes being toppled by the fall of one domino.

7. To avoid such a CDS-triggered collapse, the European Union and its proxy agencies (European Central Bank, etc.) are attempting to call a default by Greece something other than “default.”

8. This will theoretically keep the first domino–a credit-default swap–from falling.  In other words, if we call a default by some other name, then it isn’t a default.

9.  Those absorbing the losses caused by a Greek default (and let’s stipulate that this references owners of Greek debt who bought CDS as insurance, not speculators who leveraged CDS at 30X the actual bond value) will want to cash in their insurance, i.e.  the CDS they own against a Greek default. They have every incentive to demand a default be  recognized as a default. If they accept the official plan to avoid calling a default a default, then all the losses will be theirs and none will fall to the counterparties who sold them  the CDS.

10. How is this fair?

11. The official response of avoiding default is focused on self-preservation, not fairness, justice or the rule of law.

12. The system can be likened to a pool of $100 bets leveraged off $5 in cash. If every bet is covered perfectly, then it’s somewhat like $95 in bets being paid by passing $5 around–much like the famous email that depicts all debts in a small town being paid by the same $5.

13. In the real world, somebody’s bets and insurance will not be perfect and their obligations will exceed their cash on hand. In other words, they will end up with $3 and owe $5. They will default and the dominoes will start falling as everyone down the line doesn’t receive their $5 counterparty payoff.

14. Empires tend to fall when the interests of their Elites diverge.  We are at such a point in the global financial Empire.

15. “Extend and pretend” has “worked” for almost 2 years. If Greece defaults and it is recognized by even one player as a default, then the system will quickly unravel and cash/dollars will be king until the deleveraging runs its course.

Charles Hugh Smith – Of Two Minds

Here it comes!

NEW YORK – Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman today filed a lawsuit against several of the nation’s largest banks charging that the creation and use of a private national mortgage electronic registry system known as MERS has resulted in a wide range of deceptive and fraudulent foreclosure filings in New York state and federal courts, harming homeowners and undermining the integrity of the judicial foreclosure process. The lawsuit asserts that employees and agents of Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, acting as “MERS certifying officers,” have repeatedly submitted court documents containing false and misleading information that made it appear that the foreclosing party had the authority to bring a case when in fact it may not have. The lawsuit names JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Bank of America, N.A., Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as well as Virginia-based MERSCORP, Inc. and its subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.

The lawsuit further asserts that the MERS System has effectively eliminated homeowners’ and the public’s ability to track property transfers through the traditional public records system. Instead, this information is now stored only in a private database – which is plagued with inaccuracies and errors – over which MERS and its financial institution members exercise sole control. Additional defendants include BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, Chase Home Finance LLC, EMC Mortgage Corporation, and Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.

“The banks created the MERS system as an end-run around the property recording system, to facilitate the rapid securitization and sale of mortgages. Once the mortgages went sour, these same banks brought foreclosure proceedings en masse based on deceptive and fraudulent court submissions, seeking to take homes away from people with little regard for basic legal requirements or the rule of law,” said Attorney General Schneiderman. “Our action demonstrates that there is one set of rules for all – no matter how big or powerful the institution may be – and that those rules will be enforced vigorously. Only through real accountability for the illegal and deceptive conduct in the foreclosure crisis will there be justice for New York’s homeowners.”

I like it, I predicted it, and now we have an attorney general with a set of balls who has finally stood up and acted upon what, in my view, was both inevitable and necessary to clear the property title system, return it to a functional state, and ultimately allow the market to clear and housing prices to return to sustainable value.

This appears to be NY’s answer to the Miller-brokered “settlement”; it appears to be rather succinct and easily-understood too, distilled down into something like this:

The testimony and questioning this morning is rather interesting….

Ryan is going to town on him as I write this and I have to wonder if he reads Tickers, as he’s pointing out:

• He’s bailing out fiscal policy with near-zero interest rates.  That is, we are able to run trillion dollar plus deficits because he is playing with ZIRP and QE.  Ryan basically told Bernanke that Congress is not comprised of adults and that Bernanke must pull system liquidity in order to force Congress to do its job!
• He used the words stable prices.  What he did not do is bend him over the desk and give him one or two good ones from behind on the “2% inflation” game, but it’s a start.
• He’s pointing out that trashing saver’s investment income and forcing them into risk is counter-productive.  Mr. Ryan recognizes capital formation will get the job done?  THAT is a change.
• He called him out on creating the housing bubble.  Heh heh heh…..

There’s more — but this is a change, and a marked one, in how the questioning is unfolding.  With that, here’s my commentary on the testimony.

February 2, 2012

Chairman Ryan, Vice Chairman Garrett, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and other members of the Committee, I appreciate this opportunity to discuss my views on the economic outlook, monetary policy, and the challenges facing federal fiscal policymakers.

The Economic Outlook Over the past two and a half years, the U.S. economy has been gradually recovering from the recent deep recession. While conditions have certainly improved over this period, the pace of the recovery has been frustratingly slow, particularly from the perspective of the millions of workers who remain unemployed or underemployed. Moreover, the sluggish expansion has left the economy vulnerable to shocks. Indeed, last year, supply chain disruptions stemming from the earthquake in Japan, a surge in the prices of oil and other commodities, and spillovers from the European debt crisis risked derailing the recovery. Fortunately, over the past few months, indicators of spending, production, and job market activity have shown some signs of improvement; and, in economic projections just released, Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) participants indicated that they expect somewhat stronger growth this year than in 2011. The outlook remains uncertain, however, and close monitoring of economic developments will remain necessary.

As is often the case, the ability and willingness of households to spend will be an important determinant of the pace at which the economy expands in coming quarters. Although real consumer spending rose moderately last quarter, households continue to face significant headwinds. Notably, real household income and wealth stagnated in 2011, and access to credit remained tight for many potential borrowers. Consumer sentiment has improved from the summer’s depressed levels but remains at levels that are still quite low by historical standards.

Note that nice hidden statement in there.  The entire problem with the last 30 years is that we have continually spent more than we made through the economy.  Again, for Mr. Ryan (who will get this by fax) and the rest of those on The Hill:

Over the last 30 years there was no actual growth funded by output.  It was all borrowed.

That’s the root of the problem and it must be addressed.  Addressing it will cause financial contraction for some period of time — it cannot be otherwise, as the demand represented by that excessive borrowing was not real and as such the withdrawal cannot do other than cause direct contraction in the economy itself.

Household spending will depend heavily on developments in the labor market. Overall, the jobs situation does appear to have improved modestly over the past year: Private payroll employment increased by about 160,000 jobs per month in 2011, the unemployment rate fell by about 1 percentage point, and new claims for unemployment insurance declined somewhat. Nevertheless, as shown by indicators like the rate of unemployment and the ratio of employment to population, we still have a long way to go before the labor market can be said to be operating normally. Particularly troubling is the unusually high level of long-term unemployment: More than 40 percent of the unemployed have been jobless for more than six months, roughly double the fraction during the economic expansion of the previous decade.

There as been no recovery in employment.

The key here is that tax receipts are inexorably tied to the Employment Rate.  But more tellingly the fact of the matter is that the US Government has never managed to extract materially more than 19% of GDP in taxes.  Expecting that we can do it now is naive — therefore, raising taxes will not raise revenue, but lowering taxes doesn’t spur actual revenue; the history is that what lower tax rates do is spur borrowing which in turn feeds bubbles instead of healthy economic growth!

The premise of continually borrowing more to create more and more fake demand is a Ponzi scheme.

Uncertain job prospects, along with tight mortgage credit conditions, continue to hold back the demand for housing. Although low interest rates on conventional mortgages and the drop in home prices in recent years have greatly improved the affordability of housing, both residential sales and construction remain depressed. A persistent excess supply of vacant homes, largely stemming from foreclosures, is keeping downward pressure on prices and limiting the demand for new construction.

The problem is not foreclosures.  It is the refusal of regulators to force actual values to be recognized by financial institutions, which in turn has prevented the market price from sinking to the level of actual value.

The fact of the matter is that the total loss that has to be absorbed in the housing market has been stymied by these policies, which in any firm without such “blessing” would be flagged instantly as an act of fraud, that is causing the market to remain “inflated” and is thus preventing it from clearing.

Yes, I know, everyone “hates” foreclosures. Except, that is, for the person without a house who would like to buy one cheap!  Funny how we all like low prices — except when we’re sellers, or worse, when we’re municipal governments that built tax bases and rates on bubble prices that were utterly ridiculous and banks that loaned money on fictitious values that would be rendered instantly insolvent were the truth to be recognized.  Then it’s “bad”.

In contrast to the household sector, the business sector has been a relative bright spot in the current recovery. Manufacturing production has increased 15 percent since its trough, and capital spending by businesses has expanded briskly over the past two years, driven in part by the need to replace aging equipment and software. Moreover, many U.S. firms, notably in manufacturing but also in services, have benefited from strong demand from foreign markets over the past few years.

Uh huh.  Look at the GDP report and the import/export balance lately?

More recently, the pace of growth in business investment has slowed, likely reflecting concerns about both the domestic outlook and developments in Europe. However, there are signs that these concerns are abating somewhat. If business confidence continues to improve, U.S. firms should be well positioned to increase both capital spending and hiring: Larger businesses are still able to obtain credit at historically low interest rates, and corporate balance sheets are strong. And, though many smaller businesses continue to face difficulties in obtaining credit, surveys indicate that credit conditions have begun to improve modestly for those firms as well.

Economic growth does not come from credit.  Bubbles come from credit.

Economic growth comes from economic surplus, otherwise known as “profit.”  Borrowing suppresses economic surplus as the cost of borrowed funds, otherwise known as “interest” comes off the top line and thus is a dollar-for-dollar charge against profit.

So low interest rates may appear to reduce this impact but in fact all they do is produce uneconomic output — that for which there is no driver from profit.  This is otherwise known as “malinvestment” and it is bad, not good.

Globally, economic activity appears to be slowing, restrained in part by spillovers from fiscal and financial developments in Europe. The combination of high debt levels and weak growth prospects in a number of European countries has raised significant concerns about their fiscal situations, leading to substantial increases in sovereign borrowing costs, concerns about the health of European banks, and associated reductions in confidence and the availability of credit in the euro area. Resolving these problems will require concerted action on the part of European authorities. They are working hard to address their fiscal and financial challenges. Nonetheless, risks remain that developments in Europe or elsewhere may unfold unfavorably and could worsen economic prospects here at home. We are in frequent contact with European authorities, and we will continue to monitor the situation closely and take every available step to protect the U.S. financial system and the economy.

Short form:

Let me now turn to a discussion of inflation. As we had anticipated, overall consumer price inflation moderated considerably over the course of 2011. In the first half of the year, a surge in the prices of gasoline and food–along with some pass-through of these higher prices to other goods and services–had pushed consumer inflation higher. Around the same time, supply disruptions associated with the disaster in Japan put upward pressure on motor vehicle prices. As expected, however, the impetus from these influences faded in the second half of the year, leading inflation to decline from an annual rate of about 3-1/2 percent in the first half of 2011 to about 1-1/2 percent in the second half–close to its average pace in the preceding two years. In an environment of well-anchored inflation expectations, more-stable commodity prices, and substantial slack in labor and product markets, we expect inflation to remain subdued.

Against that backdrop, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) decided last week to maintain its highly accommodative stance of monetary policy. In particular, the Committee decided to continue its program to extend the average maturity of its securities holdings, to maintain its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments on its portfolio of securities, and to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent. The Committee now anticipates that economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.

As part of our ongoing effort to increase the transparency and predictability of monetary policy, following its January meeting the FOMC released a statement intended to provide greater clarity about the Committee’s longer-term goals and policy strategy.¹ The statement begins by emphasizing the Federal Reserve’s firm commitment to pursue its congressional mandate to foster stable prices and maximum employment. To clarify how it seeks to achieve these objectives, the FOMC stated its collective view that inflation at the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve’s statutory mandate; and it indicated that the central tendency of FOMC participants’ current estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment is between 5.2 and 6.0 percent. The statement noted that these statutory objectives are generally complementary, but when they are not, the Committee will take a balanced approach in its efforts to return both inflation and employment to their desired levels.

Oh really Ben?  Your mandate is for stable prices.

I will note that 2% inflation produces this over the “longer term” for an item that costs $3.50 today (say, for example, a gallon of gasoline) and I’ve taken the liberty of extending it over a working man’s life (45 years)

That’s gas prices for you, Mr. 20 year old, by the time you’re 65.

How about your kids?  Let’s extend this out 100 years:

Oh yeah that’s gonna work out real well.

Now what if Ben is off by just 1%, and it’s 3% instead?

And over 100 years?

This is why a mandate of stable prices must be enforced as exactly that — stable, or unchanging, and we must start imprisoning those who “interpret” things otherwise.

Fiscal Policy Challenges In the remainder of my remarks, I would like to briefly discuss the fiscal challenges facing your Committee and the country. The federal budget deficit widened appreciably with the onset of the recent recession, and it has averaged around 9 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over the past three fiscal years. This exceptional increase in the deficit has mostly reflected the automatic cyclical response of revenues and spending to a weak economy as well as the fiscal actions taken to ease the recession and aid the recovery. As the economy continues to expand and stimulus policies are phased out, the budget deficit should narrow over the next few years.

That’s a nice theory.  It does not, however, fit with the facts.

Unfortunately, even after economic conditions have returned to normal, the nation will still face a sizable structural budget gap if current budget policies continue. Using information from the recent budget outlook by the Congressional Budget Office, one can construct a projection for the federal deficit assuming that most expiring tax provisions are extended and that Medicare’s physician payment rates are held at their current level. Under these assumptions, the budget deficit would be more than 4 percent of GDP in fiscal year 2017, assuming that the economy is then close to full employment.² Of even greater concern is that longer-run projections, based on plausible assumptions about the evolution of the economy and budget under current policies, show the structural budget gap increasing significantly further over time and the ratio of outstanding federal debt to GDP rising rapidly. This dynamic is clearly unsustainable.

The CBO estimates ridiculously large expansion of the economy as a whole, expiration of all of the tax cuts passed (and no new ones) and ridiculously small expansion in overall spending at a number of levels.  The one place they’re reasonably accurate is in their projection of health expense, which has grown by about 9% over the last 30 years (from $53 billion to ~$820 billion) and will continue to do so.  This is not a demographic problem either, as is often said — it also present in the private economy which is not subject to that distortion.

These structural fiscal imbalances did not emerge overnight. To a significant extent, they are the result of an aging population and, especially, fast-rising health-care costs, both of which have been predicted for decades. Notably, the Congressional Budget Office projects that net federal outlays for health-care entitlements–which were about 5 percent of GDP in fiscal 2011–could rise to more than 9 percent of GDP by 2035.³ Although we have been warned about such developments for many years, the time when projections become reality is coming closer.

Actually it’s coming now.  With a 9% rate of growth the rule of 72 tells us that health spending doubles every eight years!  If you think we can keep doing this for even one more eight year cycle, you’re wrong.

We are literally a few years — three or four at the outside — from hitting the wall at 120mph as within four years we will have added $410 billion a year to deficits and in eight nearly one trillion per year.  That’s not a one-year deal, it’s every year and it will utterly destroy any attempt to bring balance to the budgetary process.

This must be stopped right now or it will kill us and we do not have time to address it.  Those are the facts.

Having a large and increasing level of government debt relative to national income runs the risk of serious economic consequences. Over the longer term, the current trajectory of federal debt threatens to crowd out private capital formation and thus reduce productivity growth. To the extent that increasing debt is financed by borrowing from abroad, a growing share of our future income would be devoted to interest payments on foreign-held federal debt. High levels of debt also impair the ability of policymakers to respond effectively to future economic shocks and other adverse events.

No.  This grossly understates the case; we will not make it through the next one cycle (eight years) say much less two.  To believe we can manage to spend over three trillion dollars at the Federal level in 16 years is an outrageous lie and the idea that we can absorb another $400+ billion annually in deficits before 2016 and $800+ billion annually by 2020 is preposterous. 

That which cannot happen will not happen.

This puts the lie to claims by Ryan, Southerland, Miller and others that “those over 50 will not see their Medicare tampered with.”  Oh yes they will, as for them to “not have it tampered with” they’d have to make it through four cycles of doubling, not two, which would increase Federal health spending at present rates of acceleration to more than $13 trillion by the time that person reaches 85, or some 16 times the present amount.

I have put forward a number of points on this issue and how to address it under the Health Care topic — we have to stop bleating and start doing, right here and right now.  Look particularly at my postings on this topic from 2009 and 2010.

Even the prospect of unsustainable deficits has costs, including an increased possibility of a sudden fiscal crisis. As we have seen in a number of countries recently, interest rates can soar quickly if investors lose confidence in the ability of a government to manage its fiscal policy. Although historical experience and economic theory do not indicate the exact threshold at which the perceived risks associated with the U.S. public debt would increase markedly, we can be sure that, without corrective action, our fiscal trajectory will move the nation ever closer to that point.

No, we will go off the cliff.  Stop mincing words Ben — see above, and that’s just health care; it ignores everything else.

To achieve economic and financial stability, U.S. fiscal policy must be placed on a sustainable path that ensures that debt relative to national income is at least stable or, preferably, declining over time. Attaining this goal should be a top priority.

Even as fiscal policymakers address the urgent issue of fiscal sustainability, they should take care not to unnecessarily impede the current economic recovery. Fortunately, the two goals of achieving long-term fiscal sustainability and avoiding additional fiscal headwinds for the current recovery are fully compatible–indeed, they are mutually reinforcing. On the one hand, a more robust recovery will lead to lower deficits and debt in coming years. On the other hand, a plan that clearly and credibly puts fiscal policy on a path to sustainability could help keep longer-term interest rates low and improve household and business confidence, thereby supporting improved economic performance today.

Nonsense. Again, we have never managed to grow the economy faster than we’ve accumulated debt over the last 30 years.  We must accept this and reduce debt, which means we must accept economic contraction.  I know nobody wants to, myself included, but what I want and what I must do are two different things.

Fiscal policymakers can also promote stronger economic performance in the medium term through the careful design of tax policies and spending programs. To the fullest extent possible, our nation’s tax and spending policies should increase incentives to work and save, encourage investments in the skills of our workforce, stimulate private capital formation, promote research and development, and provide necessary public infrastructure. Although we cannot expect our economy to grow its way out of our fiscal imbalances, a more productive economy will ease the tradeoffs that we face and increase the likelihood that we leave a healthy economy to our children and grandchildren.

You cannot both add to debt and support capital formation (which is saving.)

It’s really that simple — we must accept the economic adjustment that has to be made, and we must accept it now.

The Market-Ticker

Discussion (registration required to post)