Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2
Is it the fault of the new, complex financial products?
Profits
3
The problem is more fundamental
It’s official: There is a flaw in mainstream thinking
For almost 20 years, Alan Greenspan, Fed Chairman (Aug 1987 – Jan 2006), was the oracle
on banking, monetary, fiscal and economic policy.
A pillar of the Washington Consensus, he recommended deregulation, liberalisation and
privatisation, because markets, left to their own devices, would produce the best possible
result (e.g. his advice to Asia 10 years ago).
In October 2008, all this changed. The Maestro testified to Congress that his fundamental
grasp of the operation of banking systems and markets was ‘partially wrong‘.
He had uncovered “a flaw” in how the free market system works.
He charged that “the modern risk-management paradigm… – the whole intellectual
edifice – has collapsed” due to the banking crisis.
His belief in the self-regulatory forces of the markets had been “shaken”.
4
But this is not the first banking crisis…
5
Why do we observe recurring banking crises?
6
It is always the same old – but little known - cause
7
What is money?
Textbooks say they do not know. They talk about deposit aggregates M1, M2, M3 or M4, but admit
that these are not very useful measures of the money supply.
The M measures are not in a stable and reliable relationship to economic activity (‘velocity decline’,
‘breakdown of money demand’)
This is a world-wide “puzzling” anomaly (Belongia Chalfant, 1990). The quantity relationship “came
apart at the seams during the course of the 1980s” (Goodhart, 1989). “Once viewed as a pillar of
macroeconomic models”, it “is now … one of the weakest stones in the foundation” (Boughton, 1991).
Even the Federal Reserve does not tell us just what money is:
“there is still no definitive answer in terms of all its final uses to the question: What is money?”
8
Who creates money? How is it allocated?
9
Puzzles
“direct finance”
10
What Makes Banks Special?
History of Banking: Banking has been at the core of the economy, business
cycles, wars, many major political developments
Schumpeter (1912): Banks are special.
They are the central settlement system of the economy. They operate “a
huge system of credits and debits, of claims and debts, by which capitalist
society carries on its daily business of production and consumption.”
Thus it is “more useful to start from the credit transactions and look upon
capitalist finance as a clearing system that cancels claims and debts and
carries forward the differences – so that money payments come in only as a
special case without any fundamental importance.”
In other words, credit is the key.
11
Some crucial facts that you are not supposed to know
12
Banks create money – out of nothing
Balance Sheet of Bank A
Step 1 New deposit of $100 with Bank A
Assets Liabilitie
s$ 100
Step 2 Bank A uses the $100 as reserve with the central bank
Assets Liabilitie
$ 100 s$ 100
Schritt 3 With a reserve requirement of 1%, Bank A can now extend $ 9,900 in
credits. Where do the $ 9,900 come from? From nowhere.
Assets Liabilities
$ 100 $ 100
+ +
$ 9,900 $ 9,900
13
What makes banks special? They create 98% of our money
- Their role as the economy’s accountants AND their ability to
individually create credit makes banks special (MacLeod 1855; Schumpeter
1912)
14
The fundamental cause of banking crises:
The privatised creation and allocation of money
15
Some features of the credit market
- Given the reality of credit creation, the quantity of credit is the key
budget constraint on activity and thus determines growth, asset prices
and should be used for policy
16
The effect of credit creation depends on the use of money
Case 1. Newly created purchasing power is used for transactions that are not part
of GDP (financial and real estate transactions). In this case, GDP is not directly
affected, but asset prices must rise (asset inflation).
Credit creation for financial transactions CF ➙ Asset Markets
Asset Inflation:
17
Credit flows explain the boom/bust cycles
30%
Loans to the real estate industry,
construction companies and non-
bank financial institutions
18
Types of Speculative Credit Creation (CF)
Margin loans (credit for financial speculation)
Loans to non-bank financial institutions
Credit for real estate speculation:
to construction companies
–
Mortgages, buy-to-let mortgages
–
real estate investment funds, other financial investors
–
19
This is how the ‚Bubble Economy‘ works:
The proportion of financial credit creation rises (CF /C ↑).
This creates capital gains from speculation and bolsters balance
sheets.
The myth of the continually rising asset price comes about
asset prices rise
corporate balance
sheets improve
21
The Cause of Past Banking Crises
USA 1920er Jahre (‚Margin Loans‘):
speculative credit creation
Scandinavia in the 1980s:
Japan in the 1980s: speculative credit creation
Asian Crisis, 1990s:
UK property bubble until 2007: speculative credit creation
US property bubble until 2006:
speculative credit creation
Irish property bubble until 2007:
Spanish property bubble until 2007:
speculative credit creation
22
The effect of the credit creation depends on the use of money
Case 2. The newly created purchasing power is used for transactions that are
part of GDP. In this case, nominal GDP will expand:
credit creation for ‘real economy transactions’ CR ➙ nominal growth
two possibilities
23
How to avoid banking and economic crises:
1. Avoid unproductive credit creation (speculative and consumptive credit creation).
If this form of credit creation rises in the banking system, it cannot be repaid without major problems. Crises follow.
24
What is required: transparent regulation of the qualitative
allocation of credit creation
25
Who carries greatest responsibility for the crisis?
Investors, bank employees and mortgage borrowers merely responded to the incentive structure
presented to them.
The creation of bubbles and hence the crisis could have been prevented by monitoring and directly
targeting speculative credit creation.
Central banks have the means and know-how to do this; they did so world-wide until the early
1970s.
In the 1980s they said that such ‘credit guidance’ had to stop as free markets would deliver better
results, and, besides, that they should be granted total independence from the government.
26
How can we end the cycle of recurring banking crises?
Either return the power to create the money supply to the public
or institute rigorous controls and transparency over the money creation and allocation
decisions of banks.
Either abolish central banks and render them departments of the gov‘t (finance
ministry)
Or make them legally dependent on democratically elected institutions, accountable and
transparent concerning their credit creation policies.
Then monitor and restrict the allocation of credit to productive uses (defined as being
sustainable and welfare enhancing).
27
The activities of central banks need to be scrutinised
28
Interest rates don’t lead economic growth – they follow it
Rates are not negatively correlated to growth – but positively
True for long, short, nominal and real rates - and in almost all countries
Nominal GDP and Call rate YoY% Nominal GDP and Call Rate %
Japan 10
Call rate % 12
9 10
8
8 8
Nominal GDP (L)
7 6 6
6 4
4
5 2
4 0 2
3 -2
2 Call rate (R) 0
-4
1 Nominal GDP YoY% -6 -2
0 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03
-4 1 6 11
Traditional story:
Interest rates are the result – and hence cannot be the cause of
growth.
Thus why would central banks use interest rates as policy tool?
That is an impossibility.
What will happen next?
– This depends on the policy response.
Often economists are in danger of staying far too optimistic in this type of
banking crisis.
The reason is that it is not difficult to end it quickly, at zero costs.
But: this requires an understanding of the correct policy response and its
implementation
Unfortunately there are more examples of misguided (if well-intentioned) policy
responses
31
Wrong policy responses are more frequent
Banking Crisis
32
Problems with the current bail-out programmes:
Banks will remain risk-averse and could even become more vicious in foreclosing to reduce their assets
(the most aggressive mortgage forecloser currently is Northern Rock).
Credit creation in the economy is likely to fall; this means declining nominal GDP and moving towards
debt deflation and depression
Meanwhile, the total amount of debt – which caused the crisis in the first place – is increased: national debt
will rise by tens if not hundreds of billions of pounds in the UK
This debt will have to be serviced at compounding interest, and repaid. The total burden on the economy
will thus be even larger.
Moral hazard: Tax payers should not be burdened with the costs.
33
The biggest problem with the gov‘t spending programme:
Nominal GDP can’t grow without more credit used for GDP transactions
Fiscal expenditure does not increase credit creation.
The money for the government expenditure (bailout plus increased ‘Keynesian‘ spending programmes)
is being raised through bond issuance, i.e. borrowing from the economy!
This constitutes merely a re-allocation of existing money.
The national income pie stays the same size; the gov’t share of the pie merely rises.
What the government injects with the right hand, it takes out with the left – at best a zero sum game.
34
Evidence from Japan in the 1990s: Complete crowding out
- Estimation Results of Private Demand Model sample 1990 (1) to 2000 (4)
Private and Government Demand
Bn yen Bn yen
Coeff. Std. err t-value t-prob. Part.R2 10000 3000
2500
8000 G (R)
Const 430.797 323.8 1.33 0.191 0.043
2000
6000
∆GDP1 0.369 0.128 2.90 0.006 0.177 1500
4000 1000
∆GDP3 0.203 0.111 1.83 0.075 0.079
2000 500
-4000 -1500
Latest: Q4 2000
Result: β G
= –1
Without a rise in credit used for GDP transactions, nominal GDP can’t grow.
Without credit creation, fiscal policy will crowd out private demand completely.
35
Why fiscal spending programmes will not work
36
The Solution: How to recapitalise banks, increase
credit creation and boost demand - at zero cost!
All the government needs to do is change the way the bailout is funded: it should
not be the government who pays for this, but the central bank.
If the central bank pays, and keeps the assets, there will be no liability for the
government, no increased debt, no increased interest burden, and no crowding
out of private demand. Most of all, there will be zero costs for anyone.
Even the Bank of England is sure to make a profit (as it acquires assets of a value
higher than zero; but its funding costs are zero).
A radical idea, never implemented? Think again.
37
The Solution (II): How to make gov‘t spending effective
Milton Friedman (1982): abolish the central bank and make it a (small)
department within the Treasury.
Do we need central banks? The government could just issue its own
money. This way, it would not have to pay interest on its borrowing, as it
would not borrow money.
39
Why are these policies not adopted?
Lack of awareness by the public and civil servants
Role of vested interests: according to the World Bank, a “crisis can be a window for structural
reform”, and it can “be an opportunity to reform the ownership structure in the country” (Claessens
et al., 2001, p. 13).
They were, when it suited:
- Bank of England 1914
- Germany 1933-37
- Japan 1945-47
- USA 1963, JFK
40
Successful and Unsuccessful Bank Restructuring
Japan 1945-47 vs. Japan 1990s
Bad debts in 1945 approached 100%. Yet, the problem was quickly solved and a healthy
banking sector and strong economic growth re-established.
The solution: bad loans were quickly removed from bank balance sheets, without costs
to economy or government.
How? The central bank bought the bad loans above market value. On the central bank’s
balance sheet, they will cause no harm.
The costs of this solution are zero. Tax money is not used. The central bank merely
credits the sellers in its accounts.
Even if loans with a face value of 100 but a market value of 20 are purchased at face
value by the central bank, it will make a profit (of 20). (The magic of credit creation).
1990s: the Bank of Japan refused to do this, insisting on its independence.
41
The standard
‘Federal Reserve
Note’
42
Further Reading:
Palgrave Vahlen,
Macmillan, 2007
2005
43
Appendix: What economics has proven, and what it hasn‘t
Perception:
Mainstream neoclassical economics has proven that
- only free markets and free trade can lead to economic success
- government intervention of any kind is inefficient and must fail
- deregulation, liberalisation and privatisation increase efficiency.
Reality:
Mainstream neoclassical economics has proven that
- free markets and free trade would only then optimise welfare…
- government intervention would only then be inefficient…
- privatisation, liberalisation, deregulation would only then
increase efficiency…
if and only if we lived in a world of perfect information.
Appendix: What economics has proven, and what it hasn‘t